The Glades at Moorville

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 safe and were protected by staff who understood their responsibilities and how to keep them safe. People were protected from risks by very detailed, regularly updated risk assessments. Safe recruitment practices were followed. There were enough staff available to meet people's needs. Staff received comprehensive training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. The provider encouraged staff to be innovative and empowered them to access additional training and professional development.

This service scored 78 (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.

During the site visit we saw kind and respectful interactions between people and staff. Staff were seen to offer people choices and seek consent before supporting. The atmosphere in the home felt warm and open and this was reflected in comments from people and relatives.

The provider’s safeguarding policy gave clear guidance for staff about how to raise a safeguarding alert. Any safeguarding concerns were recorded appropriately and reviewed to ensure the relevant professionals were notified.

Staff received training on how to recognise and report abuse and knew the processes to be followed to keep people safe. All were confident any issues raised with the registered manager or provider would be fully investigated to make sure people were protected. One staff said, “Without doubt people are safe living at The Glades.”

People told us they felt safe at the home and with the staff who cared for them. One person said, “I feel safe here because staff bend over backwards to make me feel safe." During the site visit we saw kind and respectful interactions between people and staff. A family member said, “He’s definitely safe and there’s enough staff.” Another said, “I do feel [name] is safe. [Name] is looked after and settled.”

People's risks were assessed at regular intervals or as their needs changed. Care plans informed staff how to provide care that mitigated these known risks. Staff were kept up to date with changes in people's care during handovers and team meetings. Each person’s care and support plan included ways to avoid or minimise the need for restricting their freedom. Staff were trained in the use of restrictive interventions, the training was certified as complying with the Restraint Reduction Network Training Standards. All restrictions of people’s freedom were documented, monitored, and triggered a review of the person’s support plan.

During our visit, we saw how staff supported people to do the things they wanted to do safely. We saw how staff supported people to reduce identified risks relating to food safety and preparation. This included observational support whilst people were making their own hot drinks throughout the day.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe and were supported to understand and manage risks. People were involved in the assessment of their needs and the management of their risks where able. People believed staff would respond to their needs quickly and efficiently, especially if they were in pain, discomfort, or distress.

Staff promoted people's safety and independence. People’s care plans were regularly reviewed and in response to any change in needs. One staff member said, “We work with people to manage risks by thinking about safe ways for people to do things that matter 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.

People and their relatives told us staff were always available when they needed help or support.

There were enough staff available to respond to people in a timely way. We observed people did not have to wait long for support from staff when they needed this. Staff were vigilant when people were moving around or undertaking activities and made sure people remained safe.

There were safe recruitment processes in place. Effective systems were in place to ensure safe staffing levels were maintained at the service. The service had enough staff, including for one-to-one support for people to take part in activities and visits how and when they wanted. Records showed that staff received training relevant to their role. Staff received the support they needed to deliver safe care. This included supervision, appraisal and support to develop.

Staff said they were provided with the skills they needed to deliver a high standard of care and spoke extremely highly of the training and support they received.

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.