Dorrington House (Wells)

“People received a safe service, were protected from abuse or neglect and had their human rights promoted. Robust recruitment procedures were followed. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. Risks to people were assessed and their safety was monitored and managed. Accidents and incidents were monitored and analysed, so lessons could be learned and recurrences avoided.”

“People had their needs assessed and care plans were compiled to meet their individual requirements. People were supported to live healthy and safe lifestyles and had full support to access healthcare professionals, as needed. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and made sure people consented to their care and support.”

“Care plans were regularly reviewed and kept up to date. People were supported to make a complaint if needed and they were listened to and responded to appropriately. Information from complaints, comments or concerns was used to help drive improvement.”

“People received a personalised service and were fully involved in all aspects of their care and support. Staff worked with people in accordance with their care plans, but also made sure people were encouraged to do as much for themselves as possible. Information was accessible and available to people in a format suitable for their communication needs. Equality and diversity was consistently promoted and respected for everyone.”

“The provider’s quality assurance systems were generally effective and helped ensure care was delivered safely and in accordance with people’s needs and legal requirements. However, some checks and audits were not fully robust and needed strengthening to consistently identify and address areas requiring improvement.”