Sylvian Care Southampton

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe medicines and safeguarding. Improvements were found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

This service scored 72 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty.

Staff listened to concerns about safety and reported safety events. Managers investigated these, learning lessons and bringing about improvements, if indicated.

This included reviewing and learning from incidents and adjusting people’s care accordingly to keep them safe. Staff confirmed they would report any concerns to the office straight away and that prompt action would be taken to keep people safe. A staff member told us how this was then discussed in team meetings to share learning. They said, “[We] take learning and team members are encouraged to reflect on how the incident could be avoided in the future.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

This included completing a comprehensive initial assessment with the person and their representatives. Information regarding all health and social care professionals involved in people’s care was up to date and routinely reviewed. People were happy with their care arrangements. A relative said, “It was a very positive experience.”

A person the service supported required a short stay in hospital. Their care staff assisted with the care while in hospital to support the person safely until they came home.

Improvements had been made following the last inspection, where the provider had failed to operate effective safeguarding systems. At this inspection the provider made sure all safeguarding concerns were escalated appropriately.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to people and the best way to achieve that. Staff 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 provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff and the registered manager knew how to recognise the signs and what to do if they suspected someone was at risk of abuse or neglect. People felt safe using the service. A relative told us, “I was very happy that my sister was safely looked after, physically and socially.”

The provider took appropriate action to keep people safe. This included procedures around handling people’s money and ensuring their safety was accounted for if they were not contactable at the time of planned care call times.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Staff provided care that was safe, supportive and who they managed risk well. People felt supported by staff. A person told us, A person told us, “They just encourage me and make sure I don’t fall.”

Assessments were undertaken to identify risks to people and to the care staff who supported them. These assessments included risks associated with the environment, personal care and moving and handling.

Staff felt they had sufficient information to know how to support people safely. . A staff member told us, “There are environmental assessment forms in place with detailed information. Safety hazards: trip risks, fire safety, and access to emergency exits, stairs, bathroom setup, mobility aids, cleanliness, hygiene, and client preferences and routines. This is well documented in the client care plan and signed by the accessor.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

People had the equipment that they needed to support safe care and staff had a good understanding of how to use and maintain it. Where people were struggling to mobilise using existing equipment, staff reported concerns to professionals for review to see if alternative equipment may be required. The registered manager understood who to contact should they feel people may benefit from additional aids or equipment. Staff had training in the safe use of equipment and supervisors routinely observed them to ensure they were operating it correctly. This included making sure the equipment had been serviced and was safe, which helped to ensure it was used appropriately.

A relative told us, “We arranged a home visit for (staff members name) so that he could meet with myself, one of my other sisters and assess my sister in the home environment to make notes about the physical aspects of the house: checking on key safe, smoke alarms, personal alarm, fuse box and main water stopcock.”

The provider 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 they received support from consistent staff at the agreed times and staff were well trained and competent in their role. Comments included, “They have sufficient training”, “They run up on time”, “They can be a little bit late, 10-15 minutes. That’s because of traffic”, “I tend to have the same carers.” Safely recruited staff received training relevant to their role and the provider promoted their ongoing learning and development, with regular supervision, checks of their competency and shared learning through team meetings.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

People raised no concerns in relation to infection control. They told us staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) whilst providing care. The provider had effective infection control policies and procedures. The service carried out spot checks on staff to ensure they were following correct infection control procedures and wearing PPE safely. Staff told us there were appropriate supplies of PPE available, which helped enable them to follow good hygiene practices in people’s homes. One person told us, “They wear an apron and gloves. They change the gloves between washing and toileting, and food preparation. Sometimes they wear masks when they don’t feel well, or I don’t feel well.”

Improvements had been made to the assessment and management of of people’s medicines. The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People received their routine medicines safely and staff had a good understanding of best practice in medicines administration. Staff had received training and had been assessed as competent to provide medicines safely. A person told us, “They came to assess, and made up a MAR (medicines administration record) chart.” A relative said, “The medication was monitored and administered to a high standard, so I had no concerns at all.”

Improvements were needed for people who required creams to be applied. It was not always clear form people’s records if people had received their creams or did not require them.