HF Trust - Pound Lane

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice, for example, where incidents relating to medicines occurred the management identified these and shared lessons learnt with the wider team.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

One professional said, “They communicate clearly and act promptly when there are changes in a patient's condition, ensuring timely engagement with healthcare services.”

People were supported in a way that promoted their safety, independence, and personal choice. People told us they felt safe and comfortable in their homes. One person told us, “I feel safe here, staff help me when I need it, they talk to me in a kind way, I like living here.”

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of safeguarding procedures and acted promptly to address any concerns. Where safeguarding occurred the management team ensured this was investigated appropriately and immediate action was taken to keep people safe. Further development was needed to ensure incident records were detailed with the events that happened before, during and after. We found examples where incidents had occurred, and staff had used physical intervention. The documentation of these incidents were not clear, as well as the debriefs and learning from the incidents. The provider took action following this and met with staff to discuss the content needed when incidents may occur.

Risk assessments were person-centred and regularly reviewed, enabling people to live as independently as possible while remaining safe. These assessments considered both physical and emotional wellbeing. We found in some cases, where incidents had occurred, it was not clear whether staff had followed people’s risk assessments. The management team took action and set up training for staff to discuss individual risk assessments and support plans.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice, for example, where incidents relating to medicines occurred the management identified these and shared lessons learnt with the wider team.

Staff were recruited safely, with appropriate checks in place, and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs without unnecessary delays or rushed care.

Staff received regular training and supervision to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people effectively. This included training in areas such as autism, learning disabilities, and mental health. Staff felt they had the right skills to do their role, however some felt they would benefit from more face-to-face training. One staff member said, “I have received comprehensive training, including an induction, they have helped me understand safeguarding procedures. We have some face-to-face sessions, and we have refresher training.” Another staff member said, “It feels a lot of e-learning, it is passive, there is not the opportunity to ask questions. We have some face to face. We have medicines, moving and handling and first aid. We are also observed.”

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice, for example, where incidents relating to medicines occurred the management identified these and shared lessons learnt with the wider team.

Medicines were managed safely, and people were supported to take their medication in a way that suited them, promoting independence where possible. Staff understood people’s needs and preferences with medicines and ensured these were followed. The medicines administration record showed that people received their medicines in line with the prescribers’ instructions.

Additional documents to support staff to give ‘when required’ (PRN) medicines were in place. However, these sometimes lacked the detail that could be found in other care documents, and some of the information between documents didn’t always match.

When a PRN medicine was given staff recorded why it was needed, records for medicines used to manage distress and agitation sometimes lacked detail or if the medicine had been effective. However, we found the use of these types of medicines in the service was low.