Wakefield Supported Living

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 72 (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 provider was aware of closed cultures and how to monitor for, and mitigate the risks, associated with these. People had access to relatives, advocates, friends and professionals outside of the service. The provider proactively sought support and advice from professionals regarding the wellbeing of people they support. When accidents and incidents occurred, the provider investigated and where necessary took appropriate steps to mitigate future risks.

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. People were supported to access health care professionals when required and information from professionals was recorded in peoples plans of care. Processes were in place to share information when people moved between services, for example, hospital passports were in place.

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 provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately with relevant professionals including social workers and police, where necessary. Investigations undertaken by the provider were completed in partnership with safeguarding professionals. One professional told us, “The provider works well with us and shares information quickly.” Staff were aware how to raise concerns if they felt people were at risk and told us they felt confident to do so.

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. The provider recognised when people’s needs changed and took appropriate steps to mitigate risks. For example, staff recognised a change in a person’s mood and levels of distress, professional advice and support was sought and staff worked with the person to ascertain their preferred care and support needs. Staff were observed working with people in line with agreed plans of care.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The provider ensured that any issues within the environment were reported to the housing provider promptly, records were in place to monitor this. The environment was adapted around people’s individual needs. For example, one kitchen was arranged to support the independence of a person with a visual impairment so they could continue to safely make their own food and drinks.

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. Staff knew the people they supported well and understood people’s individual communication needs. People’s relatives told us they felt staff were knowledgeable in their roles. Staff had undertaken training in how to support autistic people and how to support people with a learning disability, their competency was then assessed to ensure they had the skills to support each individual person.

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. The provider ensured that environments were regularly cleaned, and assurance processes were in place to maintain quality in this area.

Medicines were mainly managed safely, with routine medications given when needed and stock levels checked were correct. Medicines were stored safely . However, clinical decisions regarding the administration of covert medications were not always discussed with prescribers. This created a potential risk of medicines being given incorrectly. People who were prescribed ‘as and when needed’ (PRN) medicines did not always have robust protocols that were stored consistently to ensure staff had detailed guidance specific to each person on how to manage these medicines if needed. The provider took prompt corrective actions to address this during the inspection.