Samfos Health - Merton

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 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.

There were systems in place to review feedback and identify areas for improvement, such as punctuality concerns raised through surveys and feedback. Training and competency checks were in place to ensure staff had the necessary knowledge and skills, and spot checks were used to review practice and make improvements if required. Systems were in place to review from any incidents or accidents should they occur.

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.

Care was delivered in line with planned packages, including following hospital discharge, and people received consistent support aligned with their needs. One relative described the transition into care positively, stating “My [relative] has been receiving care services since they were discharged from the hospital… the care workers are doing a great job”.

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.

Feedback consistently confirmed that staff supported people safely and appropriately. One person said, “I feel safe. They seem very professional”, and relatives told us their family members were safe with care staff.

There had not been any safeguarding concerns raised since this service started operating. Nevertheless, staff had a good relationship with the local authority and knew how to raise concerns promptly should that be required.

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.

People and their relatives were involved in planning and managing risks associated with their care. Care was personalised, and families reported being engaged in decisions and kept informed. One relative said, “I am familiar with their care plan, as we developed it together”, demonstrating collaborative risk planning. People felt comfortable raising concerns, and feedback indicated that staff listened and responded appropriately. This involvement supported safe care that reflected individuals’ needs and preferences while helping to manage risks effectively.

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 were supported safely in their home environments, and staff followed appropriate practices to reduce risks. Feedback confirmed that people felt safe in their homes and when receiving care.

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 suitably skilled staff to meet people’s needs, and recruitment and training processes supported safe care delivery. The provider had clear recruitment systems in place and ensured staff completed training and competency checks. Feedback confirmed staff were knowledgeable and professional.

One person said, “They seem very professional”. While there were occasional concerns about lateness and communication, call monitoring showed most visits occurred within expected timeframes.

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.

People and relatives confirmed that staff used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) during care delivery. One relative said, “Yes, they wear PPE”, and others reported consistent use of PPE across staff. These practices helped to protect people from infection. Staff understanding and implementation of infection control procedures supported safe care delivery in people’s homes.

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

Medicines were managed safely, and people received appropriate support where required. Care plans clearly identified the level of support people required with their medicines and accurate records were maintained of medicines administered through the provider’s electronic medicines administration records (eMAR) system.