Chetwynd House

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Since the last assessment, the manager had embedded a proactive and positive learning culture, underpinned by openness, transparency and honesty. Staff had been encouraged to raise concerns about safety and felt confident that these would be listened to, taken seriously, and acted upon. Safety events were consistently investigated and reported, with a clear focus on identifying root causes and driving improvement.

Lessons learned from incidents and feedback were used effectively to strengthen practice and prevent recurrence. These lessons were shared regularly through daily staff “flash” meetings, ensuring that learning was embedded across the whole team in a timely and consistent way.

The culture of the service had evolved to become increasingly responsive and forward-thinking. Staff demonstrated a shift from reacting to issues as they arose, to anticipating people’s needs and potential risks, enabling more person-centred and preventative care.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider had worked in partnership with people to understand and manage risks in a holistic and person-centred way. Staff recognised the importance of balancing safety with independence and choice, and care was delivered in a way that was safe, supportive and enabled people to continue doing the things that mattered most to them.

Since the last assessment, there had been a clear focus on promoting positive risk-taking. Staff supported people to maintain involvement in activities that were meaningful to them, even where mobility or independence had reduced. This approach ensured people’s emotional wellbeing and sense of identity were upheld, while risks were carefully assessed and managed.

People were also supported to remain as independent as possible in managing their own care. For example, where individuals wished to self-administer their medicines, staff worked with them to put appropriate safeguards in place. This included assessing capacity, providing guidance, and implementing risk management plans to ensure this was done safely.

Care plans consistently showed people’s relatives and advocate where appropriate were now included in care plan review and changes to people’s needs.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Since the last assessment, the manager and senior staff had ensured that medicines, treatments and their administration were safe and met people’s individual needs, capacities and preferences. There was a clear focus on involving people in decisions about their medicines, including when changes happened.

Robust systems had been implemented to strengthen medicines management. Weekly stock checks were now undertaken, and these consistently matched written records, providing assurance that medicines were being safely managed and accurately documented. Medicines in use, such as eye drops and insulin, were appropriately stored, clearly labelled and within their expiry dates, reducing the risk of administration errors.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of timely medicines administration. People received their time-sensitive medicines as prescribed, supported by processes that were reviewed daily to ensure ongoing safety and effectiveness. This approach helped to minimise potential risks associated with missed or delayed doses.

Where people required their medicines to be administered covertly (disguised in food or drink), clear and detailed care plans were in place. These included appropriate pharmaceutical guidance, ensuring staff followed safe and lawful practices in line with best practice guidance.

Oversight and communication around medicines had also improved. We observed a daily meeting led by the manager where medicines administration was discussed openly. This meeting supported shared learning, reinforced good practice and ensured staff remained informed about any changes or risks, contributing to safer and more consistent care delivery.