Archived: OSJCT Seymour House

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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 investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Incidents and accidents were recorded and reviewed by managers to ensure action to reduce the risk of a repeated incident were taken. Learning from incidents was shared with all staff to ensure they understood any changes to the way they needed to support people. Information from incidents was automatically pulled through from records to the staff handover records, to ensure staff had key information at the start of their shift. Managers could access these systems remotely, meaning the area manager could maintain oversight of what was happening in the service.

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. People and relatives told us systems worked well when they first moved to the home, with good communication. People’s health conditions were documented, and they were supported to access services from a range of professionals. The provider ensured information was shared appropriately with other professionals. Assessments completed when people started using the service ensured there was detailed information about services they were using, to make sure their support was maintained.

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. People said they felt safe in the service. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their safeguarding responsibilities and said they completed regular safeguarding training. Staff were confident managers would take appropriate action if they reported safeguarding concerns but were aware how to raise these concerns outside of the organisation if they needed to. A social worker who had been involved in a safeguarding case at the service told us the manager has been positive in trying to resolve the issue. They said staff at Seymour House were open and transparent, and willing to engage with professionals when needed.

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. However, risk management plans were not always kept up to date with current information. Four of the 5 plans we reviewed contained missing or contradictory information. Examples included missing information about people’s health conditions and contradictory information about whether a person could use their call bell. The provider took immediate action to amend the plans during the inspection site visit. Despite the missing information, staff demonstrated a good understanding of the risks people faced and how to support them safely. People told us they felt safe when receiving care.

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 told us the home was well maintained. The provider assessed the service for risks and took action to ensure people, staff and visitors remained safe. Equipment, such as fire systems, water systems and hoists had been regularly serviced and tested to ensure they were safe. Staff told us action was taken quickly when repairs were needed.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. Staff worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. People told us they felt there were enough staff available and said staff responded quickly when they requested assistance. People said staff had the right skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Required pre-employment checks had been completed for staff before starting work. New staff received an induction, including opportunity to shadow experienced staff until they were confident. Staff told us they felt there were enough of them on each shift and said they received regular training, supervision and an annual appraisal.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of infections spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. People told us the service was always kept clean. We observed staff following good infection prevention and control practice, to help keep people safe. Staff said they had completed infection prevention and control training and had access to all the equipment they needed.

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 told us staff provided good support for them with their medicines. Staff received training in the safe management of medicines and a manager observed their practice to ensure they were doing this safely. Staff kept accurate records of the medicines people had been supported to take.