Haydon Park Lodge

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

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff understood their duty to protect people from abuse and knew how and when to report any concerns they had to managers and staff. There was a clear understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and this was only used when it was in the best interest of the person. Staff assessed and reviewed risks to people regularly and made sure people were involved in making decisions about how they wished to be supported to stay safe. Risk assessments were clear and provided sufficient guidance to staff to keep people safe. Recruitment procedures were robust, this meant that only staff who were deemed suitable and fit, were employed to support people. Records showed there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff deployed throughout the care home at all times. Staff received the appropriate training and support to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.

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 registered manager worked closely with the local authority and understood their responsibility to report any safeguarding concerns in a timely manner. People received their care and support in line with the Mental Capacity Act and in the least restrictive way.

The service had a safeguarding procedure. Staff received safeguarding training and understood their role in protecting people from abuse.

People using the service told us they were safe at the service. One person told us, “I feel safe.” Another person said, “I’m not worried about anything.” Relatives we spoke with also told us they had no concerns about the safety of their family members and that they were safe living at Haydons Park lodge. They told us, “[Family member] is very happy, she has been there for so many years, she’s safe”, “Very happy, they look after her. She’s safe” and “[Family member] is settled there. It has a nice atmosphere.”

Staff understood people’s needs and risks and followed the plans in place to reduce them. Staff received the training they required to provide care and support safely.

Risks to people had been assessed and included risk management plans to help staff prevent or minimise these identified risks to people. Risk assessments were individual to people and included ways in which people could live independent lives whilst being as safe as reasonably possible. These risks included area such as supporting people with when doing activities, out in the community, aspects of daily living. Risk assessments had been reviewed recently which meant staff had up to date information about the action they needed to take to keep people safe.

Risks to people’s safety was managed well, with no unnecessary restrictions. People told us staff knew how to support them with known risks and that they were involved in planning the care they received.

The care homes environment and the staff practices we observed support the standard of care described in this quality statement. We observed people were supported to do the things they wanted to do and staff helped them to do this safely.

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

People told us there were enough staff to support them and to engage in the activities they wanted to. Relatives of people that we spoke with also told us there were enough staff at the service. One relative told us, “We visit regularly and sometimes will just pop over, there is always enough staff.”

Staffing levels were flexible and based upon people’s needs and preferences. For example, staffing levels were increased to support people to participate in activities outs. The registered manager carried out checks on staff that applied to work at the service to make sure they were suitable to support people. This included checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) who provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Training records showed staff had access to relevant training courses to support them to meet people’s individual needs. These records showed that training was current which meant staff stayed up to date with latest practice. Staff received regular supervision and an annual appraisal to support and evaluate them in their roles and to identify future training needs.

The registered manager told us they regularly reviewed staffing levels at the service to make sure there were always enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff confirmed that there were always enough staff available throughout the day and overnight to meet people’s needs. Because there were enough staff available, the provider did not need to use agency workers. This meant people were supported by a familiar and consistent staff team.

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.