Sylviancare South Gloucester

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm, although we found some improvements were needed to how incidents and accidents were being managed and documented through the provider’s quality assurance system.

We have not awarded this service a score for Safe.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Safe.

The registered manager spoke positively about having a culture that provided safe care to people. They held regular weekly meetings with staff so they could discuss any lessons learnt including discussions around good practice. We found improvements were needed to ensure all incidents and concerns were being documented within the service quality assurance system. This included actions taken and the outcome, when the information had been raised and the details of this. During our assessment we found 1 incident of unexplained bruising had not been logged within the service quality assurance documentation. We raised this with the registered manager who provided us with information of the incident. This meant we were not assured sufficient action had been taken and a notification to CQC had not been submitted in line with requirements.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. People’s visits were scheduled with staff who they were familiar with. Staff gave examples of when they would support someone to access additional health care support. They told us they would gain consent from the person prior to them calling the person’s GP or district nurses.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives whilst protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. Staff had been trained in identifying abuse and knew who to raise concerns with if the need arose. People felt safe and 1 person told us, “I have always felt very comfortable with all the carers.” During our assessment we found improvements were needed to ensure the registered manager shared 1 safeguarding concern appropriately with the local authority when needed. More information is within the quality statement of learning culture.

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, we found some improvements were needed to ensure risk assessments contained important information. For example, although some information was within the person’s care plan and associated care planning documentation. We found 2 people needed information within their risk assessment with how staff were to support them with their mobility and equipment. We raised this with the registered manager so they could action these shortfalls.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Care plans contained important information such as if the person used a pendant alarm.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. Staff had suitable checks undertaken prior to their employment. Staff worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. People were supported by staff who knew them well. Feedback was mostly positive from people who told us they had regular staff who were punctual. Although 1 person raised with us the importance of their visits being provided at a consistent time. We raised this with the registered manager so they could review this with them.

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. Staff had a good understanding of when and how to use personal protective equipment and had received infection control training. A person told us staff wore personal protective equipment and washed their hands. They told us, “Staff wear gloves and aprons and wash their hands.”

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. People were supported by staff who had received training in the safe administration of medicines. Where people needed support with their medicines this information was documented within the person’s care plan and medicines administration chart.