Tavistock Court

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.

As part of this assessment, we looked at 3 quality statements for the key question of safe. These were safeguarding, involving people to manage risks and safe and effective staffing.

People told us they felt safe when staff supported them with their care and support. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to maintain their independence and keep them safe. There were enough skilled and competent staff to ensure they could safely support people and staff were recruited safely.

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.

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.

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.

People told us they felt their care and support was managed and provided safely. One person said, “The staff make me feel very safe by their confident and reassuring manner. They really know what they are doing.” Another person commented, “I know the staff are well trained and that makes me feel safe.”

Staff we spoke with told us they felt comfortable to report unsafe practice and were knowledgeable about safeguarding. One staff member informed us, “I complete safeguarding training regularly and I know what to look for if I was worried someone was suffering abuse.” Another staff member commented, “I would report anything I saw if I had concerns. The managers here are very good, and I know they would deal with it professionally.”

The provider had suitable adult safeguarding systems and procedures in place. A record of concerns and safeguarding incidents was maintained and monitored to help ensure these were responded to effectively and learnt from. We saw safeguarding training was completed by all staff. Records confirmed that the provider reported safeguarding concerns as required to the relevant agencies.

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 were protected against the risk of avoidable harm. One person told us, "I have a stumble every now and again and the staff do things like making sure there is nothing on the floor, so I don’t fall.” Another person told us how staff supported them to access the town centre safely and said, “The staff help me to go into town to buy things for my flat.”

Staff were aware of the risks to people. One staff member informed us, “We use an electronic system for our records and risk assessments are all on there and very accessible.” All staff we spoke with told us they felt they could confidently support people safely, and that the risk assessments accurately reflected people’s needs, and the way they should be supported.

People had risk assessments in place which guided staff on how to keep people safe. For example, if people were at risk of falls, a risk management plan was put in place to reduce the likelihood of any falls. Risk assessments were reviewed and updated quickly if there had been any changes or incidents. For example, where people had a fall their risk assessment and care plans were updated and referrals made to a relevant healthcare professional for further support in relation to their mobility.

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

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.

We received positive comments from people about the staffing levels at the service. One person told us, “There is always someone around. Staffing has not been something that’s worried me.” People told us they were supported by a consistent group of staff who they knew well. One person said, “I normally get to see the same staff which is important to me. They know what I need, and I don’t need to direct them.”

Staff told us they felt staffing numbers were sufficient to meet the needs of people and keep them safe. Staff informed us that they were well supported in their role and had regular and relevant training. One staff member said, “I had an induction, and I get regular training, both on-line and face to face. I receive regular supervision, and I do feel well supported.” We observed a relaxed atmosphere where staff had time to sit with people and chat. One staff member told us, “We are lucky here. We have enough staff, and we don’t have to rush.”

Rotas demonstrated that there were enough skilled and competent staff to ensure they could safely support people who used the service. We saw that an ongoing schedule of training was in place, to ensure staff kept up to date with good practice. New staff completed an induction period, which included shadowing more experienced staff to get to know people, as well as covering the basic training subjects. Records provided evidence that staff had regular 1-1 supervisions and annual appraisals. Staff’s performance was monitored and managed well. Safe recruitment practices were followed for staff working with children and adults. Checks were carried out including references and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS).

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.