Magna

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

The service had suitable amounts of appropriately trained staff in place. Staff were knowledgeable and understood individuals support needs. The providers policies, processes and procedures supported people being kept safe from the risk of suffering abuse or coming to 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.

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 safe living at the service. Asked what they would do if they were unhappy at the service, a person told us, “I would go to the manager or the team leader and tell them what I’m not happy about and they would help me. I have done it before, and it was sorted out”. A person said they felt safe with the staff. They told us, “Staff can help me get out of getting into trouble and back me up. I do feel safe with the staff”. A relative said staff used ‘clear boundaries and communication’ to prevent their family member becoming distressed. The relative told us, “The boundaries they have here are working well and you can tell [person] is much happier.” Another relative said, “The staff really understand [person] they know them so well. They get out and about and are safe in the home. They don’t just watch [person] they interact with them.”

Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew what to do and who to speak with if they had concerns about a person's well-being. Staff said managers always addressed their concerns about people’s safety. A staff member told us, “I know how to report safeguarding concerns [and] how to whistle-blow. I believe [staff] will always be taken seriously and our comments welcomed.” If staff needed extra support managing a person's distressed behaviours they involved outside specialists, for example the local authority's in-reach team. This gave them the advice and reassurance they needed to work with people in the safest and most effective way.

We saw staff use different interventions to support a person effectively. We queried how one person was supported to buy culturally appropriate food for their own use. Managers told us when the person did this the service provided the money. However, there was no clear record to show this. After our inspection visit managers put an improved support plan in place to ensure all staff understood how best to support the person when they wanted to buy food for themselves.

The provider had good processes in place to ensure people were safeguarded. People's support plans provided guidance to staff on how to work with people safely. Staff protected people from harm, following the provider's safeguarding processes and protocols. Safeguarding incidents were recorded, referred to other agencies as necessary, and addressed. The manager carried out detailed and thorough safeguarding investigations when necessary and shared the results with the relevant agencies.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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 a relative were happy with the staff team. A person told us the staff were 'brilliant, nice and helpful'. A relative said they were 'kind and caring'. A person told us how staff supported them if they were feeling ‘down’. They said, ‘they know me well and how to help me’. A person told us how staff encouraged them to become more independent, supporting them with money-management and cleaning. A relative said, “The 1:1 staff [person] gets has made a huge difference to them.'

Staff and managers said there were always enough staff on duty to support people safely. Staffing levels ensured people had 1:1 care when they needed it. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting well and understood their health and wellbeing needs. There were sufficient staff with the right skills to support people to achieve their aspirations and potential. For example, staff had enabled people to choose individual holiday destinations and personalise their rooms. Staff said they were safely recruited and had the training they needed to provide a good standard of care and support.

The service was well-staffed. People had one-to-one staffing as required. There were enough staff on duty to enable people to take part in activities, inside and outside of the home, supported by staff. People got on well with the staff members and were happy in their company. Staff knew people well and communicated with them using their preferred methods of communication. When people received one-to-one support, the staff member's skills and experience were matched to the needs of the person. A staff member said, “It’s a delicate balance allocating staff to people, some need more input than others. Managers and leaders ensure people have the right staff that suit them.” We observed people and staff were well-matched and had good, positive relationships. Staff used their training, for example positive behaviour support (PBS) , to diffuse situations where people were at risk of becoming distressed.

Managers had sufficient oversight of staffing levels at the service and adjusted it as necessary to ensure people's needs were met.

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.