Astor Court

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 this key question 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.

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

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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. People felt safe. One person said, “If anything happened to me or if I saw another person being treated badly, I would go to [Registered manager name], but I would not hesitate to contact safeguarding.”

Staff had received training in recognising abuse and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS). Staff identified incidents of safeguarding and had shared them with the local authority. Consent had been obtained and DoLS applied for in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

During the assessment it was found that not all Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) documentation was in place. This was going to be reviewed.

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. Staff could access people’s care records easily to follow risk management plans. We observed positive interactions between staff and people who could not easily express their needs or who quickly became distressed. Staff said they received the right training to meet

people’s needs safely. One person told us, “I am very independent, but I had a fall. Since then, the staff still let me do things for myself, but they watch me like a hawk."

Where some people had specialist beds in place, the information in care plans needed to be updated to ensure the information was correct, including the settings they should be set at. The provider was given feedback and was addressing this.

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. Staff were busy, but did not appear to be ‘hurried’ and were able to spend time with the people. One relative said, “Since my loved one was so poorly, they (staff) have all made time to come and see her. It's heartwarming to know how loved she is."

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. We saw a small number of staff entering kitchen areas without the appropriate PPE equipment in use. We brought this to the attention of the management team who addressed this immediately. The home was clean and tidy, and staff had received training in infection, prevention and control procedures.

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. Regular medicines reviews took place with local GP’s. People told us their medicines were administered in a timely manner.

The records regarding homely medicines needed to be updated and reviewed including the storage of these medicines. The provider acted on our feedback. Topical creams were reviewed by the provider to ensure these were safely stored. This included not storing on top of wardrobes. This needed to be continually monitored. After feedback, a review of the electronic medicines recording system took place to separate medicines information for two services on the same site.