Ann Challis

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 inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff knew how to report accidents or incidents. These were reviewed by the manager and actions taken to reduce the risk of a reoccurrence. A member of staff said, “We discuss any accidents in the handover about how we can try to reduce them; all the staff are friendly, and we can be open with each other.”

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. Initial assessments were completed for people moving to the home which detailed their support needs and preferences. Staff said they were given a verbal handover of people’s needs before they moved in.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They 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 service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. People felt safe living at Ann Challis. A relative said, “Yes 100%, I sleep at night, and I have peace of mind. I have no fear about [Name’s] safety at all.” Staff understood how to recognise the signs of abuse and what to do if they suspected someone was at risk. Where people lacked capacity to make their own decisions, appropriate applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were made to protect peoples’ rights.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Potential risks were identified, and guidance written for staff to minimise these risks. Risk assessments were reviewed each month and when people’s needs changed. People and their relatives told us they were involved in discussing people’s support needs and were informed when people’s needs and wellbeing changed.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Regular health and safety checks were completed, and all equipment was serviced in line with legal guidelines. Any maintenance issues were completed in a timely way. The environment met the needs of people living with dementia with appropriate signage and décor.

The service 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. People, relatives and staff thought there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff were safely recruited. We discussed ensuring a full employment history was obtained for all staff. The application form was updated immediately after the assessment. The management team made spot checks and observations of staff practice. Regular supervision and staff meetings were used to discuss staff practices.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. The home was visibly clean throughout. Cleaning schedules were used to ensure all areas were regularly cleaned. A recent local authority environmental health audit had shown a high level of compliance.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened. People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff competencies for administering medicines were assessed, however we observed 1 member of staff not following best practice. The manager followed this up immediately when we informed them. People’s support needs for their medicines were recorded in their care plans. A recent local authority medicines optimisation team visit had been positive.