Som Care Ltd Also known as Som Care

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

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 maintained a list of any incidents, accidents or other events that had occurred. No serious and significant events had occurred. We found that the provider reviewed this record each month to check if further action was needed to learn from and mitigate the risk of untoward events. There was clear guidance for care staff about what to do to report events and other concerns and our feedback from staff confirmed that they understood what was expected of them.

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.

We received feedback from a commissioning authority who told us “The agency appears proactive where our client is concerned and seems to go above and beyond. For example, when our client had a hospital admission Som Care staff stayed with them, even though the additional hours were not contracted for with our client.”

The provider’s policy clearly outlined that an assessment of needs was required by the agency as a part of their consideration into whether they could provide safe and effective care for the person. We looked at the pre-admission assessment for the most recent person who started to use the service. This had been completed in detail. We also viewed information about the service liaising with the commissioning authority about the transition of another person to be provided with care and support by a different organisation to ensure continuity of care. The service had worked will with enabling this transition.

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 using the service and relatives who spoke with us were clear that they felt safe. Care staff told us “I have safeguarding training. I know what to do if I am worried about someone being harmed” and “I have received safeguarding training and understand what to do if I am concerned about someone being at risk. I know who to report concerns to.”

The safeguarding policy and guidance for care staff was clear and outlined what action staff should take if concerns arose. The staff team demonstrated a good understanding of what to do if they believed any person was being harmed or was at increased risk of harm. If concerns did arise the provider worked with partner agencies to investigate and resolve concerns.

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.

Care staff told us they received training so that they were aware of risks and what to do if new potential risks emerged. They told us “I speak with people about risks and explain how we can manage them safely while still respecting their choices” and “I speak with people about risks and help them to stay safe.” Staff training records we viewed confirmed this.

The risk assessment policy was detailed and outlined that risks for each person must be reviewed quarterly or sooner if events occurred for people that increased potential risks to them. We looked at each person risk assessments and found that these were taking place and considered people’s personal care needs and more general environment and safety.

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

No one using the service made any comments about not feeling safe in how their care was provided by care staff and the provider organisation. Comments that we received from care staff showed that they understood potential risk for people in their own homes. We were told that “I believe the places where people live are safe. If I see something unsafe, I report it to the office” and “If I notice anything unsafe, I report it their family and the managers at the office].”

Risk assessments included consideration of people’s home environments to promote people’s safety, and safety of care staff.

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.

Care staff were positive in their feedback about having the training they needed to carry out their work and support people. They told us “Yes we are enough staff to support people. If there is a problem, the manager helps me” and “I am given training to learn my work. If something happens, managers explain and help us learn.”

The provider carried out pre-employment checks including Disclosure and Barring Service checks (DBS), employment history and pre-employment interviews, all of which they kept a record of.

Staff were allocated to work with specific people which helped to keep consistency of care and all visits were recorded. Another benefit of this was that it helped to build positive relationships between staff and the people they were caring for. People using the service and relatives commented on this in their feedback to us.

We were provided with records of staff training and prior qualifications. The training topics covered were, for example, safeguarding, medicines management, care planning and infection prevention and control among a range of other topics. Training records that we viewed showed the date of the training being undertaken and the date that any update and refresher training should be undertaken were clearly recorded.

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 told us that “We follow all national guidance on infection control, including the Health and Social Care Act 2008 Code of Practice on the prevention and control of infections. Our staff receive up-to-date mandatory training in infection prevention and control, including hand hygiene, safe use of personal protective equipment (PPE), and effective cleaning practices.”

Care staff told us that they were provided with personal protective equipment for use when providing personal care. They said “Yes my manager gives me gloves, aprons face mask sanitiser to help me do my care job.” and “I have the equipment I need to do my job safely.”

Care staff were trained to understand and take action to minimise any risks of infection and to take action to report any arising concerns to the provider. Care staff were provided with suitable stocks of personal protective equipment to use when providing personal care.

The provider carried out monthly infection control audits, and the outcome of these was recorded along with any action needed if required.

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.

Care staff told us that “I have training for giving medication safely” and “I receive training and clear guidance on supporting people with their medicines and follow MAR (Medicines administration record) and care plans.”

Two people currently required assistance to take their medicines. We looked at the MARs for each person from October to December 2025 and these were detailed, showing what part of the day the medicine should be taken (For example, morning, lunchtime and later in the day), the medicine strength and dosage. No gaps were found on these records, which were reviewed each month by the provider to monitor their accuracy and completion.