The Old Vicarage

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

People lived in a home where there was a positive culture. Concerns were listened to, and action was taken to learn and improve.

Throughout our inspection visits the provider and registered manager showed a commitment to ongoing learning and improvement.

Accidents and incidents were analysed monthly and changes to people’s care in response to these were shared with staff.

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 staff worked with other professionals to make sure people had their needs met. This included regular visits to the home from district nurses and GP’s. Records were kept of all medical appointments to make sure referrals made to other professionals were clearly recorded.

People lived in a home where they felt safe with their care and the staff who supported them.

Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns about abuse. All staff spoken with told us they were confident that any issues raised would be taken seriously and action would be taken to protect people.

People looked comfortable and relaxed and told us they felt safe. One person said, “It’s a very calm and together place. I do feel safe here.”

People lived in a home where some improvements were needed to make sure risks were fully assessed and managed to enable them to receive safe care and safely do the things they chose to do.

Some care plans contained risk assessments but these were not always comprehensive. On our first inspection visit we found one person was using bedrails but there was no risk assessment in place. This had been completed by our second visit.

Some people did not have falls risk assessments in place. This could place people at risk of not receiving the support they needed to keep them safe. The provider gave assurances that these would be completed and informed us when this had been achieved

Staff knew people well and were able to tell us about how they safely supported people. Staff told us any changes to people’s needs were always discussed with them.

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 lived in a home which was well maintained and safe. There were regular health and safety checks, and equipment was serviced by outside contractors.

All areas of the home were well maintained.

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.

There were enough staff to meet people’s physical and social needs. People told us call bells were answered promptly if they rang for assistance. During our inspection visits we saw call bells were answered quickly meaning people did not wait for long periods for support.

Staff felt there were always enough staff. One member of staff said, “We are never understaffed.”

Staff had access to a range of training to make sure they had the skills to safely support people. The provider was looking into additional training in some healthcare topics which had been recommended by visiting professionals.

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.

All areas of the home appeared clean and fresh. Staff received training in infection prevention and control and had access to personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

People lived in a home where improvements were needed to make sure medicines were safely and effectively managed.

People received their medicines safely from staff who received annual training to carry out the task. At the time of the inspection visits, staff who administered medicines only had their competency assessed when they first completed their training to enable them support people with medicines. We discussed this with the registered manager who gave assurances they would implement an annual competency check in accordance with best practice guidance.

On our first inspection visit we found some improvements needed to be made to ensure there were robust records for the administration of all prescribed medicines. For example, there was no clear record of the administration of prescribed creams and lotions. There were no personalised protocols in place where people were prescribed medicines on an as required basis. This could lead to inconsistent administration of medicines. However, by our second visit improvements had been made and further improvements were planned.

People had confidence in the staff who administered medicines. One person told us, “They do the medication – I don’t have to worry about it. They know what they are doing.”