Bournemouth Rainbow Ltd

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

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from 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.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff knew how to ensure people were protected from harm and abuse; people were happy. A person said, “I am very happy with my staff [name] they help me.” Staff told us how they would raise concerns to the registered manager and if it was necessary to an external agency such as the local authority. Staff told us they were certain the registered manager would follow up any concerns and make the necessary referrals to keep people safe from harm. Staff were confident people were safe with their care and support. A member of staff said, “I believe the people we support are safe, because they’re well trained, experienced and loving staff members who offer consistent person-centred care, following individual care plan and risk assessment.” People’s rights were fully respected, and staff had received training in safeguarding during their induction with annual reminders and updates. The providers safeguarding policy underpinned the processes to ensure people were safe. Records showed all referrals had been made as appropriate.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. People’s risks were assessed before they started to use the service and updated regularly or as things changed. Environmental risk assessments were in place which considered fire safety, emergency utilities and evacuation plans. Risk assessments were created and maintained within the provider electronic care planning system, this meant they were easily accessible. Information about people’s risks were detailed, for example for a person who was at risk of falls, the staff member said, “The risk assessment outlines specific strategies aimed at mitigating the risk, such as the use of mobility aids, regular exercise, and modification of the environment.” People were involved in decisions about their care and risk assessments; we observed staff discussing with a person the safe and agreed ways of carrying out a task. Records considered people’s right to take risks, make unwise decisions and were detailed to keep people as safe as possible.

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

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. People told us staff were kind and caring, they had regular staff to help meet their needs. Staff were positive about their colleagues and the provider. Induction and shadowing were ongoing, staff were introduced to the person they would support and completed shadowing and training where necessary. The registered manager and deputy manager were qualified to train staff in certain areas, meaning they had provided training in accordance with a person’s individual needs. A member of staff said, “I have received training in key areas such as safeguarding, manual handling, first aid and dementia care..” Recruitment processes were in place; staff were recruited safely. Procedures were in place to ensure required background checks were completed prior to staff commencing their employment. This included enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff told us they felt appreciated and supported by the registered manager. A programme of competency assessments, spot checks, supervisions and meetings had supported staff and the registered manager to maintain their standards of service.

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.