Devon Lodge Residential 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

As part of this assessment, we looked at 4 quality statements for the key question of safe. These were, safeguarding, involving people to manage risks, safe and effective staffing, and medicines optimisation. People told us they felt safe, and their care was delivered safely. People's risk of experiencing avoidable harm were reduced by the provider's risk assessments and risk management plans. There were enough skilled and competent staff to ensure they could safely support people and staff were recruited safely. People received their medicines as prescribed.

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.

We saw that staff treated people with kindness and understanding. They were knowledgeable about people's individual needs and preferences and took account of this when they provided support and assistance to keep people safe. For example, we saw people being supported to mobilise around the service safely.

People told us they felt safe. One person said, “Very safe. Safe as houses, the staff make sure they keep us safe." Another told us, "This is a very safe place. The carers make sure I don’t fall." A third person commented, “I feel safe here. It's very reassuring that the carers are always about if I need help."

The provider had systems and processes to respond and manage any safeguarding incidents and concerns and they followed local safeguarding protocols when required. Staff had received training to protect people from avoidable harm. They understood how to report any concerns if they needed to by following safeguarding or whistleblowing procedures. The registered manager understood their responsibility to report safeguarding concerns.

Staff knew how to take action to minimise the risks of avoidable harm to people and were passionate about ensuring people were safe from harm. One staff member commented, “I would report something straight away if I was worried. There is always someone to go to, to report anything worrying.” Another said, "I would report anything if it concerned me. The manager’s door is always open, and they are approachable. I know the manager would deal with anything professionally and thoroughly."

We observed staff supporting 1 person who was new to the service and had become anxious. Staff were able to take appropriate steps to reduce their distress and anxieties.

Staff were aware of people’s risk assessments and felt they could confidently support people safely. One staff member said, “Risk assessments are detailed and in place to help us keep people safe. They are a good guide for us to make sure we support people safely and they also keep us the staff safe."

Risks were assessed, monitored, and managed. Care plans and risks assessments were in place and had been reviewed regularly or when there were changes. For example, people's specific needs around their mobility and falls.

People were protected against the risk of avoidable harm. One person told us, “I think there is a risk assessment in place to stop me falling.” Another said, "Yes I have one of those too."

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

Staff rotas showed that sufficient numbers of staff were consistently deployed to fully meet people’s needs. The provider's 'on-call' system enabled staff to contact senior staff out of hours and at weekends to obtain advice and direction to meet people's needs safely. The provider followed robust recruitment procedures to ensure people were protected from staff that may not be fit to support them.

I think there is plenty of staff and there is always someone there to help. The girls are absolutely fantastic and do a sterling job." Another commented, "There are enough carers to help us with the things we need to do. The girls are so very good at what they do." I can't faut them." A third person told us, "The girls are very well trained. They know what to do and the best way to do it."

Staff expressed satisfaction regarding staffing levels. One staff member told us, "We have a team of regular staff now. There were some issues when we had to use agency staff but that doesn’t happen much now. We have a tight knit team who are all very good with the same values.” A second member of staff said, “We have very good team working and we all support each other. We are not rushed off our feet and always have time for a chat."

We observed sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs. For example, people were supported at meals times to ensure their dietary needs were met. There was a good rapport between people and staff, and we saw a lot of banter and laughing. There were sufficient staff to support people with activities and saw people having their hair done, taking part in making Easter flowers, reading the newspaper, and doing crosswords.

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.

People received their medicines safely. One person told us, “They always ask if I need pain relief. I've never had any problems." A second person said, “I get my pain relief when I need it, and if I don’t, they don’t give it, but they always ask."

People were given their medicines in a way that met their individual needs and by staff who had competed training. Protocols were in place to manage how people received ‘as needed’ (PRN) medicines. Medicines were stored securely, and Electronic Medication Administration Records (EMAR) were completed accurately after each person had received their medication. We saw evidence that regular auditing of medicines was carried out to ensure that any errors could be rectified and dealt with in a timely manner.

Staff told us that they received training in the safe administration and their competencies were regularly assessed. One commented, “I have had training to use the electronic medication system that we use here. It’s a good system and is less likely for mistakes to occur.”