Hunters Lodge Care Home

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

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Staff recorded any incidents or accidents that occurred. Systems were in place to ensure these were investigated and reviewed. Managers carried out an analysis to determine if there were any themes and trends or learning required, and action was taken to reduce the likelihood of incidents reoccurring. Staff confirmed learning was shared with them in various ways such as in meetings or during handover. Relatives told us they were informed if a safety incident occurred and were confident in the actions of the service to reduce the likelihood of reoccurrence. For example, 1 relative explained their family member was at high risk of falls and said, “As a result, they lowered his bed to the floor and put a soft mattress on the floor next to his bed in case he falls out of bed. He has pads on his hips which protect his hips if he falls.”

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They 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 service shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People appeared happy and relaxed in the home. Relatives told us people received safe care at Hunters Lodge. For example, 1 relative said, "It’s fantastic here. [Relative’s name] gets good, safe care.” The provider had robust safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures which staff knew how to use. Staff were confident their managers would listen and act if they raised a concern.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The service was meeting the legal requirements as DoLS had been appropriately applied for.

If restrictions were in place for people’s safety, this had been undertaken in line with the MCA except from 1 time. Once this was identified, prompt action was undertaken to ensure the person’s rights were being respected and upheld. Mental capacity assessments had been carried out for decisions where there was any doubt about people’s decision-making ability. The registered manager took prompt action when we told them that some people's mental capacity records could benefit from more detail.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Risks associated with people's health conditions and support needs were assessed, monitored and managed effectively. Risk assessments were individualised and provided staff with guidance about how to reduce risks for people without restricting their rights and independence.

Risks to people were discussed in meetings on a regular basis. This ensured all staff were aware of any changes, and actions were put in place to reduce risks. Staff had good knowledge about the people they supported and understood what action was needed to keep them safe. We saw that people’s risk assessments were followed. For example, some people received a modified diet in line with their risk assessments to reduce the risk of choking.

Relatives told us the service managed risks associated with people's needs safely whilst being able to do the things they enjoyed. For example, 1 relative said, “[Name’s] room opens up onto the garden, they let her take the risk and walk in the garden, it keeps her fit.”

The service 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.

People received their care and support from staff who had the skills needed to support them. Comments from relatives included, “The staff are very skilled and go with how he wants it”, “There are enough staff, and they seem well-trained in dementia. They respond quickly if they see a situation escalating and are able to calm things down.” and “On 1 occasion [Name’s] breathing was of concern, they [staff] checked her oxygen levels every 10 minutes and called an ambulance. You couldn’t fault their care.”

The registered manager told us they had improved staff training by increasing the frequency, variety and format. Staff were positive about this. For example, 1 staff member said, “I’ve had training in infection control, dementia, fire, moving and handling, mental health, literally everything we need to do our jobs well. It’s very important and very useful.”

Staff told us they were well supported and received regular supervision. This provided an opportunity for a supervisor to meet with staff, discuss their training needs, identify any concerns, and offer support. Staff said this was beneficial. They also said they could go to any member of the management team at any time in between supervisions and were confident they would be listened to and well supported.

Staff were safely recruited. All required checks had been undertaken prior to staff commencing employment.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure that people’s medicines were managed, stored and administered safely. We observed safe administration of medicines. Records showed people received their medicines as prescribed, at the right times and in a way that suited them. Relatives told us people received their medicines safely. For example, 1 relative said, “The medication is given safely, they [staff] make sure of that.”