Sawley

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.

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. The provider had systems and processes in place to identify where learning was required following accidents and incidents. The manager understood their responsibilities and analysed incidents accidents and safeguarding events to minimise the risk of reoccurrence.

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. The service had established systems in place to ensure people were safely supported to access other services when this was required. Staff regularly liaised with professionals to ensure people were supported safely with their health conditions. For example, appropriate referrals had been made when staff had identified a person need additional support with their diet.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them 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 had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and understood how to report any concerns. The provider had robust systems in place to ensure safeguarding incidents were promptly investigated and reported. People and their relatives consistently told us the service was safe. One person told us, “I like it here, and yes I feel safe.” A relative told us, “I think [person] is looked after well, [person] is settled I have no doubt in my mind [person] is safe.”

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. Risks which affected people's daily lives, were documented and known by staff. The manager monitored and regularly assessed these risks and took appropriate actions to ensure people received care in a safe and consistent way. It was evident people were involved in the planning of their care, people had regular meetings with staff to discuss this. One person told us about the measures they had agreed with staff to ensure they could pursue their hobbies and interests safely.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. We found the service to be well maintained and the furnishings and lay out of building met people’s needs. Regular checks of the environment were carried out to ensure people’s safety, this included tests of the fire alarms.

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, staff and relatives all confirmed to us they felt the service was adequately staffed. The manager monitored and regularly reviewed people’s one to one hours to ensure these were fulfilled. We found the provider had made improvements to their recruitment processes following our last inspection, at this assessment we found staff were recruited safely and through recruitment checks were now in place. The provider followed safe recruitment processes to ensure people were suitable for their roles. This included undertaking appropriate checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) and obtaining suitable references. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. People also had opportunities to be involved in the provider’s recruitment and selection processes.

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. The provider had systems and processes to ensure infection, prevention and control measures were regularly audited. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was available throughout the services and staff confirmed there was always an adequate supply of this.

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. Medicines were administered by trained staff who received regular checks and direct observation of their practice. Stock levels corresponded with the records in place and audits of medicine administration records were conducted regularly by the management team and provider. Staff ensured people's feelings were not controlled by excessive and inappropriate use of medicines.