Poppy Court Extra Care and Outreach

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

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

Relatives told us they knew how to report accidents and incidents and felt listened to. Safety incidents were appropriately investigated and action taken. One relative told us, “We have in the past highlighted a few things, they have been looked into and fed back. Satisfied.” Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff understood the importance of reporting incidents and accidents without delay and accurately. Relatives were kept well informed with regular updates and expressed confidence their loved ones were well cared for. Systems were in place to demonstrate how complaints and lessons learnt were shared with staff.

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. Relatives told us they were supported to have a smooth transition when their loved one moved in. One relative said, “Transitional process was in place by the time they moved in, no problems.” The service collaborated with people and healthcare partners to ensure safe systems of care were effectively managed and monitored. Records viewed demonstrated a thorough pre-admission assessment. People`s support needs were detailed within their care plans and risk assessments on the electronic system. Information was shared effectively with health and social care professionals and other services.

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.

Relatives told us they were able to raise concerns and confident they would be investigated and dealt with appropriately. One relative said, “Absolutely comfortable raising and probably via email so it’s recorded.” Safeguarding information was clearly displayed in shared areas, including guidance on what to do if there were concerns about abuse or wrongdoing.

Staff confirmed they knew how to report potential safeguarding concerns within the service and felt confident to do so. One staff member told us, “We know residents well, monitor signs of withdrawal, marks, bruises or financial concerns. We would tell manager, ring safeguarding and speak to someone.” Another staff member said, “Completed a lot of training in the last couple of months. Oliver MgGowan training was amazing, realised what people go through.” The provider had effective systems in place to ensure concerns were reported to the local authority quickly and appropriately. Additional information was available for contacting external agencies such as the local authority, police, and the Care Quality Commission.

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 relatives told us they felt safe in the service and were complimentary about the staff. One relative said, “Keep me updated, very proactive with managing care. Really great, take time to listen and understand. Don’t know how we would have managed.” Staff knew people well and explained how to support them safely. One staff member told us, “Care plans are very concise and detailed, people will share and talk to us.”. Risk assessments had been completed to assess people for risks to their health, safety and well-being. We saw examples of risk assessments completed with involvement from people and multi-agencies. There was evidence of risk awareness and management for people identified as vulnerable to exploitation and allegations, including consideration of risk of self-harm. This demonstrated positive risk management to support people whilst managing individual needs. The risk assessments were reviewed regularly and as and when changes occurred.

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 relatives told us they believed there were enough staff on duty. A relative told us, “Seems to be plenty of staff, it’s nice they are the same staff.” Another relative said, “There are always staff around including out of hours, always someone available to speak to.”

Staff recruitment files contained appropriate checks, including DBS and right-to-work verification. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer.Where gaps were identified in application histories, these were followed up. Processes were in place to obtain references, with full employment histories documented. Staff were subject to probationary periods, with progress monitored and improvements addressed through supervision and feedback.

The registered manager and management had oversight of training within the service.

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 told us staff supported them to keep their homes clean. Staff had sufficient supplies of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). They told us they followed procedures for the use and safe disposal of their PPE. They had received training to help them maintain good standards of infection control.

Systems were in place to ensure regular audits were completed.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They could look after their medicines if it was safe for them to do so. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Medicines management systems were well organised. Medication Administration Records (MARs) were complete with no gaps identified. Medicines were given in a safe way and had clear guidance detailing what the medicine was for. When it should be offered, and maximum safe dosages. Staff demonstrated safe practice by recording PRN (people’s as and when’ medicines) were offered and declined.

Staff told us they felt well supported, and they were knowledgeable about people and their medicines. They told us they had received training and competency checks, to ensure safe administration. Daily medication checks were completed by a senior staff member, and regular stock counts were in place. Clear guidance was available for the safe use of inhalers and topical medicines, including emollients, with fire safety risks considered.

Systems were in place to ensure regular audits took place to identify areas of improvement with lessons learnt shared with staff.