The Old Vicarage Care Home

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.

Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Incidents were recorded, and discussed with people, their relatives and social care professionals to prevent a reoccurrence.

Accidents, incidents and events were recorded. The registered manager was informed of any events and made necessary referrals to the local authority and the Care Quality Commission, before uploading details to the provider’s electronic system. Any learning from events, and themes or trends was reviewed at provider level and shared with all staff in team meetings.

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 service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. The service responded to concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff received safeguarding training and told us how they would raise concerns, both within the home and externally. Incidents had been analysed by the registered manager as part of their monthly audits. We have signposted the provider to the local authority safeguarding team to familiarise themselves with appropriate local guidance.

We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place, when needed, to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met.

The registered manager had oversight of these applications, authorisations, and conditions. This meant people’s rights were fully respected.

The service 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.

The registered manager monitored and reviewed staffing levels to ensure staff were there when people needed them. We observed sufficient staff on duty to support people without rushing, and we noted call bells were responded to in a timely manner.

A member of staff told us, “I have never worked short staff. There are 5 carers plus the senior on duty, laundry assistant and the kitchen team. Everything is here for me to be able to do my job.”

Staff were deployed effectively around the building to provide timely support to people, similar observations had been shared with us from visiting professionals, “The home and staff provide good quality of care” and, “Communication between us is appropriate and clear, the medical and pastoral needs of the patients are met.”

The provider had effective processes in place to ensure staff had the necessary skills and competence to carry out their roles. Recruitment records showed staff were recruited safely. This included an 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.

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 service 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.

The registered manager monitored and reviewed staffing levels to ensure staff were there when people needed them. We observed sufficient staff on duty to support people without rushing, and we noted call bells were responded to in a timely manner.

A member of staff told us, “I have never worked short staffed. There are 5 carers plus the senior on duty, laundry assistant and the kitchen team. Everything is here for me to be able to do my job.”

Staff were deployed effectively around the building to provide timely support to people, similar observations had been shared with us from visiting professionals, “The home and staff provide good quality of care” and, “Communication between us is appropriate and clear, the medical and pastoral needs of the patients are met.”

The provider had effective processes in place to ensure staff had the necessary skills and competence to carry out their roles. Recruitment records showed staff were recruited safely. This included an 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.

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 service 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.

We observed staff adhere to the provider’s medicines policy and administer medicines in line with people’s preferences. Arrangements were in place for people who wished to manage their medicines independently.

Medicines were ordered, stored at the correct temperature and disposed of securely. Medicines records showed that they were given as prescribed for people.