Cheshire & Manchester

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 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.

People and relatives told us they were happy with the support. One relative told us, “We [including the staff] are like a little family, it’s a lovely set up.” The provider was proactive in ensuring people and their relatives were comfortable in raising concerns. This was through ongoing engagement and involvement. Systems were in place to ensure accident and incidents were documented and reported to the management team.

The provider worked with people and health and social care partners to ensure people were supported safely and necessary referrals were made when required. Risks were assessed before a person moved into the service, person-centred care plans were devised which identified people’s strengths and goals. Passports were in place to allow for the sharing of information between services. These were detailed and person centred. Relatives of people who did not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves were consulted with and routinely informed of any changes.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve it. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Relatives told us they were happy with the support being provided and said their loved ones were safe. One relative said, “I can walk away at the end of the visit knowing [person] is safe.” Another relative told us, “We always come home feeling [person] is in the right place and being looked after well.”

People were actively encouraged to access the community and to engage in activities of their choice. Support was provided however, independence was encouraged. There was a whistle blowing and safeguarding policy in place and was available for people in an accessible format. Staff were able to describe the process for reporting concerns.

Risks to people were clearly documented in their care files, with actions outlined to manage and reduce them effectively. Positive risk-taking was encouraged, with appropriate support in place to ensure people’s safety and well-being. Staff provided care which was safe, supportive, and enabled people to pursue activities important to them.

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 did not consistently ensure all staff delivering support had person-specific training which was required to safely meet the needs of people. For instance, some staff had not been trained or assessed as competent in moving and handling, despite people needing to use a hoist for transfers. However, relatives expressed confidence in the staff's skills and knowledge to perform these tasks safely and did not raise any concerns. One relative told us, “I am absolutely thrilled with [staff] I have a great relationship with them all.” Another relative told us, “They [staff] are really good they are like a family. The home is not clinical. It’s like a home there.”

We observed staff were attentive to individuals' needs and employed appropriate methods of support. Interactions were positive, and discussions with staff demonstrated a thorough understanding of the people they supported. Support staff told us their line managers [team leaders] were approachable and provided support when needed.

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. We observed people’s homes were clean, tidy and well maintained.

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs. Team leaders ensured medication audits were completed, and appropriate action was taken following any concerns identified. Medication reviews were completed when required. Staff were aware of the importance of not utilising medication to suppress behaviours of concern and distraction techniques were used prior to medication administration.