Archived: Lowena

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 comfortable in the service and enjoyed spending time with the staff team. Relatives told us, “[My relative] loves going there” and “[My relative] is always happy to go there”. Manager and staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and there were appropriate systems in place to protect people from abuse. The service was well staffed and staffing levels varied in accordance with people’s specific needs. The providers recruitment processes were safe. Risks had been identified and effectively mitigated. Staff knew people well and understood how to support people to do things for themselves. There were effective systems in place to ensure people were safely supported with their medicines and finances. The service was well maintained and all necessary checks of fire safety equipment and utilities had been completed. Change had been made to the building facilities in response to learning identified from incident that had occurred.

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.

People told us, “Lowena is nice” and relatives said, "[My relative] is always happy to go, at the door [they are] off and does not look back" and “[My relative] loves going there.” People were relaxed and happy in the service during both of our site visits.

Staff and managers had a detailed understanding of local safeguarding procedures and told us they had no concerns about people’s safety. Staff comment included, “The guests are well looked after here, they are safe” and “It is a really nice place to work. When the guest come here, they get really excited.”

Systems designed to protect people from abuse were effective. There were robust procedures in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of financial abuse.

Risks had been identified and effectively mitigated. People were supported to do things for themselves where possible and care plans gave staff detailed guidance on how to protect people from identified risks. People were comfortable in the service and relatives told us the service always shared details of any incidents that occurred promptly. Their comments included, “[My relative] enjoys going”, “[My relative] is always happy to go there” and “They always inform us if anything happens.”

Staff understood people’s needs and knew how to support people to do things for themselves. Distraction techniques were use appropriately, to help people manage their anxiety. Staff reported restrictive practices were not used and this was confirmed by people’s care records.

All accident or incidents that occurred were documented and investigated. Changes had been made to the service’s facilities in response to learning identified during accident investigations.

There were effective risk mitigation systems in place. With robust procedures for documenting the receipt and return of people’s medicines and money at the beginning and end of each stay.

The service was well maintained, and bedrooms and communal spaces were appropriately decorated. Outdoor areas were clear and accessible. A summer house had been installed in an outdoor area since our last inspection to provide additional shade and space in the summer months.

All necessary check on the service’s utilities had been completed to ensure people’s safety. Personal emergency evacuation plans had been developed for everyone, detailing the support they would need in the event of an emergency evacuation. Fire drills and other routine fire safety tests had been completed.

People enjoyed spending time with the staff team and relatives told us, “The staff are lovely”, “The staff are good” and “[My relative] says ‘I loved it there; can I go again’.” The service was fully staffed and staffing levels varied in response to the individual needs of the people present in the service each night.

Staff told us the service was always fully staffed and that planned staffing levels were consistently achieved. Their comments included, “We are never short staffed, we cover for each other, someone was unwell recently. Before the management knew, we had arranged to cover their shifts”, “We are not short staffed, we are good at covering shifts if someone is sick” and “I can’t remember the last time we did not have enough staff.”

Rotas showed there were always, sufficient suitably trained staff available to meet people’s needs. Staff told us, “I have had all my training and am fully up to date.” Records showed staff training had been regularly updated to ensure staff had the skills necessary to meet people’s needs.

There were appropriate on-call arrangements in place for the provision of advice, guidance and support to the staff team when the office was closed. Staff told us these arrangements worked well. The provider’s recruitment practices were safe. There were systems in place to ensure all necessary checks were competed, to ensure prospective staff were suitable for employment in the care sector.

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.