Seagrave House 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 service 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. All accidents and incidents reporting, recording and investigation had improved. These events were used as a learning opportunity and any lessons learnt were shared with the staff team. A relative said, “If [Name] has something to say, [Name] is listened too and if anything needs changing, it is acted upon.”

The service 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. Management and staff had good awareness of people’s risks and support they needed to promote good outcomes. For example, when people were admitted to hospital or attended outpatient appointments, staff shared relevant information about the individual to ensure their needs were fully understood.

The service 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 service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. People felt safe with the staff and the care provided. A relative said, “[Name’s] care is great. [Name] feels safe and knows if anything goes wrong its sorted straight away.” Staff were trained, knowledgeable about the different types of abuse that could occur and how to report their concerns. A staff member said, “Safeguarding is protecting everyone from harm and abuse of any kind. If I saw some sort of abuse I will report to my senior team leader or the deputy. If no action is taken, I will tell the manager or whistle-blow, if I had to.” The registered manager responded appropriately when safeguarding concerns were raised. All safeguarding concerns were recorded in detail and people’s health and well-being were closely monitored afterwards.

The service 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’s care plans and risk assessment were detailed and provided best practice guidance to enable staff to safely support the individual. For example, we observed staff moved a person safely using a hoist. Staff described they followed guidance provided by healthcare professionals to prevent a person from developing further skin damage. A relative said, “[Management and staff] are always risk assessing [Name’s] needs and providing items for their safety and to meet [Name’s] needs.”

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 lived in a well-maintained home. A person said, “I can move around the home, its clutter free, and I know where the communal areas are etc.” People’s personal evacuation plans were up to date and kept under review. This meant staff had guidance on how to support people's individual evacuation needs in the event of an emergency. Systems were in place to inspect the building, fire safety, and equipment used to meet people’s needs was fit for purpose and regularly serviced. This included the safe storage of oxygen cylinders and concentrators. The maintenance staff kept an ongoing record of work which was being acted upon.

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. People and their relatives told us there were sufficient staff to meet their needs. People said, “I am surprised at how many staff there is” and “I've never had to wait for staff to come; they're quite quick when you buzz them; may be a couple of minutes but for some people a couple of minutes can feel a long time.” New staff were recruited safely. We saw there were sufficient numbers of staff deployed. The staff rotas showed unplanned staff absences had been covered by existing or bank staff. Feedback from staff about the staffing numbers was mixed. Although no one told us people’s safety was put at risk they felt an extra staff member would be beneficial. This was shared with the management. One staff member said, “Staffing is ok. When everyone needs to use the toilet at the same time staff have to coordinate; the senior team leaders and deputy helps because the lounge always has to be supervised because some are at risk of falling.” Staff received appropriate training and to meet people’s specific needs and refresher training to keep up to date with best practice. Staff were supervised and received feedback on their performance.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. People told us the home is always clean and tidy. A relative said, “It’s a homely environment, it’s very clean and it’s like it all the time.” Staff were observed wearing suitable personal protective equipment when it was required. Robust cleaning schedules were in place and audits were carried out by the management to monitor the hygiene, cleanliness and staff practices.

The service 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. People told us they received their prescribed medicines. A relative told us, “[Name] is given their medication at the correct time and is always asked if they are in pain.” Staff received training in how to administer medicine and their competence was frequently assessed by management. Staff had clear guidance to follow about particular medicines such as, administering when required pain relief medicine and safely applying prescribed medicine in patch form. Medicines were stored safely and there were appropriate arrangements for disposal, and for controlled drugs. Regular audits were carried out on medicines and action was taken when areas for improvements had been identified.