Wellhead 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

We have reviewed 3 Quality Statements in this key question. Our findings are - Systems were in place to keep people safe. There was a safeguarding policy, staff had safeguarding training and told us how they would report any concerns. Staff told us they were confident all concerns would be dealt with appropriately. People had risk management plans in place which gave staff guidance on supporting them safely. If people experienced distress there was clear guidance on what support staff were to provide and when. There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff had been recruited safely and received appropriate training for their role. Systems were in place to support staff and make sure they had opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge.

This service scored 84 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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

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.

People told us they felt safe living at the service. People had access to information about how to raise any concerns they might have. People told us they felt able to approach any members of staff or the management if they were worried.

Staff told us they had received safeguarding training. Staff we spoke with knew about different types of abuse and signs to be vigilant for. Staff were clear about how to report any alleged abuse and they were aware of the whistleblowing policy and process. The registered manager was knowledgeable about safeguarding processes and was passionate about making sure staff felt able to raise any concerns they had. The registered manager told us staff had been involved in writing the service mission statement which had a safeguarding focus.

Systems were in place to help keep people safe. A safeguarding policy was available at the service which staff were aware of. Where appropriate staff had applied to the local authority for DoLS authorisations. We found there was 1 DoLS authorisation in place which had no conditions attached. All staff had received safeguarding training which was mandatory. The registered manager had completed the local authority safeguarding training for managers of services. The registered manager told us they were passionate about making sure people were able to live their lives with minimal restrictions.

People told us they were able to take positive risks and lead the lives they wanted to. People told us they were involved in writing and reviewing their risk management plans. People did not experience any restraint at this service. Where appropriate people had opportunities to complete training in health and safety topics.

Staff told us they knew where to find people’s risk management plans and they told us there was time to read them. Staff told us they knew how important it was to know people’s needs and worked to prevent distress where possible. The registered manager told us the ethos of the care and support provided was to support people safely whilst enabling people to take positive risks. The registered manager and staff were also supported by the nominated individual who was also involved in risk management at the service.

We observed people being supported safely by staff who knew them well.

People had personalised risk management plans with all risks recorded. Where needed there were detailed positive behaviour support plans in place. These gave staff good details about how to support people when they experienced distress. The registered manager kept a ‘risk register’ which enabled them to have a good overview of all risks, the safety measures in place and when they needed a review. The registered manager told us people were involved in developing policies relating to safety and risk taking.

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

People were involved in recruitment of all new staff at the service. Records confirmed people were part of the interview panel and asked their own questions of potential candidates. People were supported by a stable, established staff team who they knew well. Agency staff were not used so people always knew who was coming to provide them care and support.

Staff told us they had enough training to feel competent in all areas. New staff told us they had a thorough induction and were able to spend time shadowing more experienced members of staff before working alone. The registered manager told us staff were encouraged to develop their knowledge and skills by taking work-based qualifications. Staff told us there were enough of them to support people safely and where needed the registered manager stepped in to help them. No agency staff were used as there was a stable group of staff employed.

We observed there were sufficient numbers of staff available to support people safely on both days of the site visits. We observed new staff had opportunities to shadow more experienced staff while learning their job roles. Staff were observed to be following safe practice and communicated with each other to meet people's needs.

Systems were in place to make sure staff had the required pre-employment checks before starting work. This included a check with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). New staff received an induction which included training in many different areas. The registered manager made sure staff had regular supervisions and an annual appraisal. Records confirmed this. Staffing numbers were calculated dependent on people's needs. The registered manager told us they always staffed the service more than needed to allow for any short notice sickness or training. This meant there was always staff available to support people to do what they wanted.

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.

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