Lady Dane Farmhouse

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 78 (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.

The home shared lessons learned in regular staff meetings and staff told us they routinely received feedback for any incidents or accidents. One relative told us, "There was one error, something small, and they immediately contacted safeguarding and the GP and phoned me to let me know."

A community professional told us, "Together we have a good relationship. They are open and transparent. Mistakes have been made in the past, however they are always quick to highlight them and seek the appropriate support to ensure they are avoided in the future."

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 good continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

The home had put easily accessible folders in people’s rooms so all need-to-know information was easily available to staff and community professionals. People had hospital passports in place to ensure when they need to attend appointments they went smoothly.

One relative told us, "We were involved with the care planning and transition when he moved there. "Another relative told us, "The constant reviews, care and attention." They described how this contributes to the safety of their relative.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The home shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff had received appropriate safeguarding training and demonstrated awareness of how to safeguard people and the types of abuse they might face. We saw examples of how the home took actions to safeguard people. The home had a good working relationship with the local authority.

One relative told us, "If there was an incident, they are the first ones to contact me. They do the right thing with incidents and report them, and take the right action, I am a health care professional so I am aware what they should be doing."

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. People and their relatives were involved in their care planning and risk assessments. People were supported to take positives risks such as managing their own medicines and staff ensured that people were able to manage this safely.

One relative told us, "They are continually risk assessing, any changes they speak to me and the community team about. Even doctors call me and speak to me.”

The provider was fully aware of all potential risks in the care environment and controlled them well. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The home was well organised and accessible to everyone living there. There were regular checks and audits in place to ensure the environment and equipment was safe. The management team had considered how people mobilised and how they could make the home adaptable and suitable for everyone’s personalised needs. They had adjusted the height of wall art and notices to ensure that people in wheelchairs or people who mobilised on the floor could easily view them. There were sensory boards at floor height for people who were on the floor to ensure they could easily access them. People’s rooms were decorated and personalised to how they chose prior to them moving in. For example, people who had interests in planes or a certain singer, this was evident by the theme their room was decorated. One person told us about their room and their likes and interests and referred to pictures on the wall.

Relative comments included, "Everyone has their own bedroom, they are very personalised, also a sensory room there which they enjoy, their rooms are homely", "The home is spotless and very inviting." And "Her room is always lovely and tidy."

There was a newly decorated sensory room for people to relax with lavender scents, calming music and dimmed lights.

The management team had recognised that fire drills could be distressing for people living at the home. People who were able, were involved in the fire drill process and the weekly fire drills. They had a role to play with the support of staff, and they were confident with this process and what to do in the event of an emergency. This supported people to feel less anxious when the alarm went off and a sense of involvement with an important role to play.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Safe recruitment processes were in place. We observed adequate staffing levels on our visit. Staff were available and attending to people in a timely manner. Staff told us they felt confident with the training they had received and were supported to undergo further training to meet people's specific needs. Staff had a good understanding of their roles, responsibilities and understood their accountability.

Relatives told us, they felt there was enough staff during the day and night.

One relative told us, "I think they do a lovely job. I don’t think [My relative] could be cared for any better than anywhere else except home. They settled in very well and their keyworker is brilliant. I go a couple of times a week, [staff] always stop and say hello to the clients. I can’t fault any of them really. They are happy there, you would know when they are happy or unhappy."

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Infection prevention policies were in place and staff had specific training for this. The home was clean and well maintained. Infection prevention control (IPC) was used in line with the IPC guidance and there was enough personal protective equipment (PPE) for staff to use. We observed staff using PPE correctly. One person told us, “They do a good job cleaning and I do some myself.”

One relative told us, "Cleanliness amazing." Another relative told us, "It Is always clean, they go round regularly and hoover and empty bins.’

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. A medication round was observed, staff were confident and had a good understanding and knowledge of what medicines people took and what they were for. Medicines were stored safely. Medicine audits took place. We saw that some medicine errors had occurred, but the home reported and recorded these correctly. One person told us they had received an incorrect dosage. This was safeguarded and reported appropriately.

One relative told us, "In past there was a missed dose, but they were straight on it and contacted me. They take the appropriate action."