SeeAbility - Bicester Support Service

Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any safeguarding concerns. We found not all concerns raised by staff had been documented within actions logs by the service in order to ensure there was a record of appropriate action taken to keep people safe. Risk assessments and management plans were in place and risks to people's safety and well-being were managed through a risk management process. People had comprehensive positive behaviour plans which guided staff on how to identify trigger and safely support people. Staff felt care plans could be updated more frequently following incidents and further training would be beneficial. People received care and support in line with their needs. During the assessment the service was fully staffed, however staff told us there were times where outings and activities were unable to take place due to staffing numbers. Staff felt they had adequate training around medicines, and regular checks of staff abilities were conducted. Not all people had adequate guidance in place for when required medicines. There was limited documentation around reasons why as required medicines was needed. The provider took action to ensure these protocols were in place following assessment.

We identified 1 breach of legal regulation in relation to governance as effective systems and processes to make sure the provider assessed and monitored the service was not always well documented.

Audits did not identify concerns that were found during assessment. There was no oversight of incidents to monitor for themes and trends, and team meetings did not always record actions or document who’s responsibility it was to complete actions and in what timeframe. The provider had quality assurance systems which identified areas of improvement, there wasn’t always effective oversight of incidents which would allow to monitor for themes and trends. We heard about action taken to manage these risks, and the provider told us further quality assurances would be put in place following the assessment.

We received mixed feedback from staff about the support they received from the provider. Supervision and team meetings took place in which information could be shared and staff voices heard. However not all staff found these meetings useful and felt further work around support available to them and people using the service could be improved.