Seraphim Home Care

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 remained requires improvement. This meant people were not always safe and protected from avoidable harm. Breaches of the legal regulations in relation to staffing and fit and proper persons employed were identified at the previous assessment in June 2024.

This service scored 59 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff reported and recorded incidents and accidents. However, the service did not have systems to analyse accidents and incidents and ensure future risks to people were mitigated. Leaders did not identify or address patterns and trends. For example, we found multiple similar incidents such as medicine errors and people not having their pendant alarms given back after personal care. Lessons were not always learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. An open learning culture was not adopted. A staff member said, when asked is learning shared when things go wrong or around good practice, “No I wouldn’t say (it is) to be honest.” The service did not have governance processes to identify where external agencies required notification of incidents and safeguarding concerns as required. For example, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and the local authority safeguarding team. This is reported on further in the well led key question.

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.

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

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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

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

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.

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