Silvanna 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 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.

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 shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Safeguarding procedures were in place to ensure people were protected from avoidable harm. Managers worked proactively with the relevant agencies, when a concern was raised, and took appropriate action to safeguard people from further risk, when this was required. Staff had received the appropriate training in safeguarding and had good awareness and understanding of the signs of abuse. Staff were aware of what actions to take to safeguard people. One staff member told us, “I would report to senior, manager or externally to CQC.” We saw evidence in team meeting minutes that safeguarding, whistleblowing and lessons learnt were discussed with the staff. The management had identified where additional training was required from lessons learnt and had sourced specialist training around those areas. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed and there was a care plan audit tool in place to monitor when reviews were due. We identified some gaps in some risk assessments which were swiftly rectified by the manager.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe and there were enough staff to help them. One person told us, “There seems to be enough staff, and they are very good to me. I like it here.” A relative told us, “We have no worries about [relative’s] safety.”

Staff could recognise signs when people experienced emotional distress and knew how to support them. We observed staff reassuring people when they were waiting for their lunch and being caring and attentive to people. Staff told us care plans had enough information for them to support people safely. One staff member told us, “I read the care plans, and they have enough information.” Another staff member told us, “If there has been a recent change to a person’s needs, the care plan is changed immediately to reflect this.” Staff told us they had specific training to support people at risk of choking and had completed manual handling training. The registered manager told us they were currently undertaking root cause analysis on areas such as falls.

There were processes in place to ensure care plans and risk assessments were reviewed and updated. Care plans had good detail in them to reduce risks, particularly around personal care and mobility. The registered manager told us people were encouraged to be involved in their care plan reviews where they can, and relatives told us they were actively involved. One family member told us, “We have been involved all along.” Another told us, “We have had lots of discussions.”

People told us they felt the environment was clean and safe and the domestic team were always available. A relative told us, “The cleaner is here all the time.” Another told us, “The home is very clean and bright.” People were supported to be as independent as possible within the environment and equipment was readily available to support them. One relative told us, “There seems to be enough equipment to go round.” Another told us, “My [relative] uses a wheelchair, and I have never seen them have to wait.” Appropriate environmental safety checks were in place, such as lifting equipment checks. Equipment was in place and safe for use, such as pressure relieving equipment, falls safety equipment and mobility aids.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe, and staff were kind and caring. One family member told us, “There are a lot of regular staff, and they know my relative well.” Another told us that there is always staff around if they or their relative needs anything. People told us staff responded to the call bell quickly if they needed anything. One person told us, “I use the call bell if needed and they are pretty quick to respond.” We observed enough staff during our on-site assessment to ensure people’s safety.

We looked at recruitment files during our on-site assessment. We identified some areas that needed reviewing, and the registered manager was quick to rectify this. Staff had received appropriate training and been inducted into their roles. The registered manager told us they discussed incidents with staff for staff learning and we saw evidence of this within team minutes.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. The provider had systems in place to monitor cleanliness of the home and all staff received infection prevention control training. Staff were practicing good IPC in their tasks. We observed correct handwashing and use of personal protective equipment (PPE). The environment and equipment appeared clean and well maintained.

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