Sister Winifred Laver Promoting Independence Centre

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. Since our last visit, the provider had implemented a more in-depth analysis to review incidents, accidents, complaints and allegations of abuse. This included identifying trends and lessons learnt to promote continuous improvement to people’s care.

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. Referrals to the service were consistently received using the agreed referral route and had clear rehabilitation goals identified. The previous delays in moving some people into permanent accommodation had been resolved and people had moved on since the last inspection.
 

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. Safeguarding concerns were reported and investigated appropriately. People said they felt safe living at the service and staff responded quickly if they needed help. A relative said, “They are always checking if everything is alright. They are very, very good.”

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. Where potential risks were identified, risk assessments had been completed which provided details of the measures needed to keep people safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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 and staff confirmed there were enough staff to meet people’s needs in a timely way. A person commented, “You just ring your bell, and it gets answered quickly.” Staff feedback about support and teamwork had improved since the last inspection. A staff member said, “We work across the team, the team works well together. You can just walk to the manager’s office if you need anything.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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. The provider had improved the system for administering medicines to ensure people received them safely. Care plans described how people wanted to receive their medicines and the quality of recording for ‘as required’ medicines had improved.