Wellfield

Records showed that staff had completed the required safeguarding training for children and adults. This was an improvement since the previous inspection.

“Training records indicated that all staff had now completed appropriate safeguarding training for adults and children.” from the report

Risk assessments and care plans did not always contain the latest information. Different documents sometimes gave inconsistent guidance, increasing the risk that staff might not follow the right actions.

“We found that these still did not always contain the most up to date information.” from the report

There was not enough guidance about when an as-needed medicine should be given. Records did not explain why it had been given, even though it was used on most days after being introduced.

“Records indicated that the PRN medication had been administered on most days since it had been introduced, but more importantly, records did not indicate why the medication had been administered.” from the report

Safeguarding information was shared with the local authority or social workers, but referrals did not always include enough detail about the concern and wider risks.

“Sufficient information about the safeguarding concern as well as the wider risk of the young people who used the service had not been included.” from the report

Incidents were not always recorded or investigated in line with the home's own policy. This meant it was unclear what action had been taken to prevent similar incidents happening again.

“Systems had not been established to make sure that incidents had been reported, investigated, and managed in a way that reduced the risk of similar incidents happening again.” from the report

The provider still lacked reliable governance systems. There was no information governance policy, some documents were not signed or dated, and arrangements for archived records were unclear.

“For example, we noted that the provider did not have an information governance policy.” from the report