Parton 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

People were kept safe from risk of abuse or harm. Staff told us and records showed that staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of the provider's safeguarding procedures and their responsibilities to report any suspicions of abuse and whistle blow if they had any concerns about quality of care. People were supported by sufficient numbers of consistent staff who had been suitably recruited and trained to carry out their role and manage people's care needs. People were involved in managing their risks and were supported with making positive risks. People's risk assessments were not always fully reflective of staff understanding. The registered manager took immediate action to address this.

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 they felt save living at the home. One person said, “Always felt safe, nothing has ever happened to make me feel not safe.” People and their relatives spoke highly of staff and felt any concerns they have would be responded to. People told us their views and choices around their care and rights were consistently respected and acted upon.

Staff told us they had received safeguarding training and were clear about when and how they would report safeguarding concerns internally and to external safeguarding agencies. The registered manager understood their role in protecting people from abuse and ensuring effective safeguarding systems were in place to keep people safe. Staff had the right training for their role and the registered manager promoted an open culture to ensure staff reported any concerns or incidents.

The registered manager and provider had effective processes in place to monitor and manage people's safety and to respond to any concerns raised by people, staff and other stakeholders. Records showed that staff had received safeguarding training relevant to their role. Systems were in place to reinforce the importance of safeguarding and to monitor people who may not be able to voice their views. The provider's safeguarding policies reflected national based guidance.

People told us that staff supported them to manage their risks. People and their relatives told us their needs were known by care staff who respected their choices. One person told us, "I can go out by myself. They have talked about how I can keep myself safe. I tell the staff and they prepare the medication in advance and I take it with me."

Staff and the registered manager had a good understanding of people's needs and understood the support people needed to minimise their risks. The registered manager had oversight of people with higher risks. Effective systems, evidence based risk management and monitoring tools were used to monitor people's risks and ensure staff followed the correct guidance. Referrals to relevant health care professionals were made as needed and their recommendations were followed. Staff promoted people's independence and ability to take positive risks.

We observed an established staff team caring for people with dignity and compassion. They knew people well and understand their needs, risks and preferences. Staff consistently spoke to people respectfully and supported them in line with their choices and their care needs.

The registered manager and provider had effective processes in place to monitor people's personal risks. We found people's risk were being managed and monitored well through a combination of the registered managers knowledge of people's needs and good communication between staff. Any concerns were recorded and escalated to the relevant health services. People's care and risks assessments were regularly reviewed, however risk assessments did not always reflect the comprehensive understanding of staff. The registered manager addressed this immediately.

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 confirmed they were supported by a regular staff team who know them well. They told us staff were supportive and they felt staff had been trained to care for them. One person said, "They’ve had training. I have confidence in them." Another person told us, "On the whole I would say there are enough staff. I have a bell and never have a long wait."

Staff confirmed that pre-employment checks and training had been completed before they started to support people. An established staff team ensured people received continuity of care. The registered manager stated they consistently reviewed and adjusted the staff levels of the home according to people's needs. The registered manager worked alongside staff which enabled them to monitor the staffing levels and staff skills.

During our assessment, we observed sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs and requests for support. Staff had time to engage people and support them with their daily activities and choices. Through our observations, we were assured that staff had been trained and skilled to support people safely.

The registered manager and provider operated effective systems to ensure people were supported by a consistent staff team who knew people well and were appropriately trained. The provider's staff development and recruitment policies and processes assisted the register manager in maintaining a reliable and knowledgeable staff team. Records showed safe recruitment practices had been followed. Systems showed that staff training and support was monitored to ensure staff remained current and supported in their role.

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.