Orchard View

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

The service was safe and has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Medicines were managed safely. Systems were followed to keep people free from harm and abuse. Incidents were reported, investigated and lessons learned. Care plans were detailed and supported staff to manage any risks whilst meeting people’s needs.

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.

People and relatives felt the service met their needs. People felt their views were considered when support was being planned and involved in how it was delivered. Relatives were involved in care planning and were informed and included when any changes needed to be made.

Staff told us there was a culture of learning at the care home. Staff told us they received training and support to carry out their role effectively. One staff member told us, “If I identify any training needs, I raise this to management and then get booked onto the relevant training as soon as possible.” Another staff member said, “The management provide effective up to date training face to face and online through E-learning.”

Processes were in place to support a culture of learning. Staff had received training in relevant topics such as the mental capacity act (MCA) and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS), safeguarding and positive behaviour support. They had a good understanding of these areas and were able to put their knowledge into practice when supporting people.

The provider worked with people and external partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, which were regularly monitored and reviewed. A relative told us, “We have regular fortnightly MDT meetings; we talk about problems and incorporate them into the care plan. No plans are made without everyone being included, the home, the social worker, the case manager and me.”

Staff understood when people required support to reduce the risk of avoidable harm, and risk assessments were in place. Staff knew people well and were able to support them safely.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to improve people's opportunities and wellbeing. We received positive feedback from healthcare professionals who worked with the service. A healthcare professional said, “I have always found communication from the care home to be very good and they keep me updated on day-to-day issues.”

Systems were in place to establish and maintain safe systems of care. Pre-admission assessments helped ensure people’s health and social care needs could be met by staff and that the service was right for the person. People, relatives and other healthcare professionals were involved in care planning. Risk assessments were in place and assisted staff readily identify how to mitigate risks

Relatives felt their loved ones were safe. People said staff were kind and compassionate and made them feel supported. One relative said, “The carers can’t do enough for him or me.” Another told us, “When he is not getting his 1-1 staff check on him every hour.”

Staff understood what to do if someone was at risk of harm. They knew when and how to raise a safeguarding concern meaning appropriate referrals were made when required. Staff had access to the safeguarding policy and had received relevant training.

Staff interaction with people supported safety and promoted independence. People were well cared for and could move freely throughout the home.

Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding and were confident if they reported concerns these would be taken seriously. Safeguarding training was mandatory and staff compliance figures were at 97%.

People had risk assessments and care plans in place which helped staff to mitigate the risks to people. Staff were able to confidently tell us how they responded in a positive way to people’s distress or agitation. Examples provided by staff showed people were encouraged to take risks that they had been assessed as safe to do.

Staff knew people well and understood when people required support to reduce the risk of avoidable harm. Staff were aware of people’s needs. They told us they were informed if there had been any changes to people’s risk assessments or care plans. Risk assessments were detailed and effectively assisted staff to safely mitigate risks.

Our observations raised no concerns about how the service managed risks to people. Staff supported people professionally, appropriately and in a safe way.

Risks to people had been assessed and risk assessments were in place to ensure people’s safety. Care plans contained detailed information regarding people’s needs and how to support them in areas such as mobility, personal care or distressed behaviour. Regular reviews took place to make sure records were up to date and accurate.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to carry out their role effectively and safely. Relatives told us their family member lived in a clean and tidy home. One relative told us, “His bedroom is kept very clean.”

Staff had received training in safe working practices and followed best practices guidance. They felt safe working at the service and had access to all the appropriate equipment they needed. There were effective systems in place to ensure the environment was maintained safely and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the environmental safety.

We observed the home to be clean, tidy and secure. Equipment was well-maintained which supported staff to deliver safe and effective care. Fire doors were functional and clear signage was displayed. We observed a fire drill which was conducted in a safe and effective way.

Records were maintained for all servicing and checks within the home. Management conducted regular environmental audits which were effective in identifying issues. The provider had policies in place for maintaining health and safety within the service.

People felt supported by staff and that there were sufficient staff available to support them. One person told us, “There are staff on the premises all the time.” Another said, “Staff are really friendly and my family member likes them.”.

Management confirmed there were the correct number of staff required to meet people’s individual needs. Staff told us that at times agency staff were used to cover when there were shortfalls in safe staffing levels. Staff felt well trained and supported and told us they were able to identify gaps in their knowledge and seek additional support.

We observed there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s care and support needs. People appeared happy with the staff, and relatives did not raise concerns about staffing levels. People who received 1-1 care had their specified hours met.

Staff were recruited safely, with relevant checks completed to ensure their suitability. Regular staff meetings allowed the manager to talk to staff about any changes in people’s care needs and to remind them of any policies, new training etc. Mandatory staff training compliance rates were at 93-100% compliant.

Systems for preventing and controlling infections were in place. Regular cleaning and measures to minimise the risk of people, staff and visitors contracting and spreading diseases were in place. People informed us the service was kept clean and tidy.

Staff told us they had access to personal protective equipment (PPE) and knew how to use it correctly. Staff had received infection control training.

We observed the environment to be clean, tidy and malodour free. Hand gels, paper towels and bins with liners and lids were used in all areas. Hand washing facilities were available, and staff were observed to use PPE and good hand hygiene.

Processes and safe practices were in place in relation to infection prevention and control. Regular audits were carried out by management and any issues were added to the home action plan for review and completion.

People and relatives were happy with how their medicines were managed and administered.

Staff completed mandatory training and received medicine competency assessments from the clinical lead. Staff understood their role in ensuring medicines were safely administered.

Processes were in place to ensure the safe management of medicines. Controlled drugs were managed in line with guidance. Fridge and room temperatures were being monitored, the treatment rooms were tidy and well organised. The management team completed a range of audits to make sure medicines were managed safely. Staff were aware of the medicine policy.