Surrey SCP

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 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. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learned to continually identify and embed good practice.

People told us they felt safe and staff and the management would go “above and beyond” to ensure people received safe care.

The provider had a system in place to record incidents and accidents. The registered manager had oversight of all incidents at the service and reviewed documentation following each event. This meant that any remedial or follow-up actions required, were completed without delay. Lessons learned were shared with staff.

Records showed incident forms were not closed and signed off until all actions had been completed. For example, following a fall, 1 person's mobility plan was reviewed, and they began using mobility equipment to reduce the risk of further falls.

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 provider had a system in place to ensure people’s important information was available to emergency services in case of an out of hours hospital admission. The information was detailed and kept up to date. This meant relevant information could be shared quickly ensuring continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Staff confirmed they supported people with their health needs. A staff member said, “I speak with healthcare professionals when needed. They are involved in people’s care when there are health concerns or changes in their needs.”

Health and social care professionals were complimentary about working with the provider. an external professional told us, “The registered manager and their team at SCP have always demonstrated excellent flexibility. They are responsive, adaptable, and work collaboratively to ensure people receive the support they need in a timely manner.”

The provider 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 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 and their relatives told us they knew how to raise any issues or concerns and were confident they would be listened to.

Staff told us they felt people were safe receiving care in their homes. Staff confirmed they knew how to and were given opportunities to raise concerns when necessary. A staff member told us, “I can raise concerns through the office, on-call service, meetings and supervision. My concerns and feedback are taken seriously.”

The registered manager had an overview of all incidents, accidents, complaints and events in the service. They understood their responsibility of when to raise a safeguarding concern with the local authority and did so without delay.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

People and relatives told us they felt involved in organising care and were encouraged to communicate with the service regarding any changes needed.

Risk assessments were detailed and person centred. Records showed they were reviewed regularly and updated using the provider’s electronic system. This meant any changes to the records were immediately accessible to staff.

Staff told us they had enough information on people’s risks and how to keep them safe. A staff member said, “We have care plans and risk assessments which explain people's individual needs. For example, if someone has diabetes, swallowing difficulties or behaviours that can put themselves or others at risk, I need to understand what their triggers are and how they should be supported. I also think communication between staff is very important because people's needs can change.”

Staff and the management team knew people well and communicated changes to people’s care needs to the relevant health and social care professionals.

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

Risks associated with a person’s home environment were assessedand regularly reviewed. This included utility shut off points and various equipment used in people’s homes.

The provider ensured they checked safety inspection dates for equipment used by people, such as hoists. Lifting equipment must be inspected regularly in accordance with the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER).

The provider had further checks in place. For example, when a staff member’s performance was assessed, their manual handling practice was also reviewed. This included checking that equipment was safe to use. This strengthened the provider’s oversight of equipment safety and helped ensure people received safe care and support.

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 relatives confirmed the provider was flexible with their visit times and had accommodated last minute changes when requested.

A relative told us, “They are very good, I would give them an excellent mark.”

Staff had regular supervisions and wellbeing checks. The provider ensured regular team meetings took place and staff had access to appropriate and relevant to their roles training.

One staff member said, “I have regular supervisions with my line manager. They are very approachable so that makes it easier. The office has an open-door policy so all of us staff know they’re always there to listen to anything us carers have to say. We also have very good team meetings.” Another staff member told us, “We have supervision where we can talk about how things are going, any difficulties we are having and whether we need any further support or training. I think it is useful because sometimes you deal with things during work and don't get the opportunity to properly discuss them until supervision.”

Staff were recruited safely, and recruitment records reflected this. Procedures were in place to ensure the required checks were carried out on staff before they commenced their employment. This included enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading.

People and their relatives told us staff worked in a safe and hygienic way.

Staf had access to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and completed infection control training.

Infection prevention and control procedures were in place, in line with the providers policy. Staff were observed to wear PPE during their competency assessments.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Medicine records were electronic and regularly audited. Staff had completed medicine related training and had regular competency assessments to support safe management and administration of medicines. Information on people’s medicine allergies was clearly documented on their electronic medicine administration records to ensure staff awareness.

Some people were prescribed ‘as required’ medicines. Guidance was in place to help staff administer these medicines safely. 

When people had time specific medicines staff’s visits were scheduled at the same time to ensure safe administration of the medicine. This was monitored by the management team.