Orchid House

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

We reviewed 1 quality statements for this key question. There were systems to keep people safe from abuse and harm. Staff had a good understanding of how to safeguard vulnerable adults and the escalation routes for safeguarding concerns. Staff felt assured that management would deal with safeguarding incidents appropriately. We observed no direct safeguarding concerns, however we did observe that some staff interactions were still not always respectful and staff still spoke about people when they were in the room. Staff had a good understanding of managing risks for people and showed awareness of positive and managed risk-taking with people who used the service. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and guidance was available for staff. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had applied to the local authority for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations.

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

We observed that staff were aware of people’s risks, for example, two people were required to have a staff member sat between them due to a number of previous physical altercations. We saw staff were doing this regularly. Staff were now responsive to people’s needs and 1:1 support was being provided in line with people’s care plans and risk assessments.

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

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

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.