Silver 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

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse, staff understood how and who to report concerns to. People were involved with managing their care and support, including risks. Staff were provided with clear guidance to support people safely. There were enough trained and skilled staff to support people.

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.

Systems and processes ensured people were not restricted unlawfully and were in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). MCA assessments had been carried out where appropriate in relation to people's care needs. Where people lacked mental capacity to make their own decisions best interest decisions were made, discussions involved relatives and professionals. A relative described how staff supported their relation, they told us, “They encourage mum to make choices but she sometimes can’t, so they make the decision for her; I’m fine with that.”

Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to escalate concerns if they were worried about people. The provider’s safeguarding policy was up to date and accessible to staff and people. A staff member told us, “We all get training on e-learning and have a whistle-blowing leaflet, any concerns I would report to [registered manager], bruises, falls, breaks, meds errors. Outside of the company I could go to CQC.”

People told us they felt safe living at the service, comments included, “The staff are all very patient, I have never heard them raise their voice or be sharp with anyone.” People confirmed they knew who to talk to if they were worried, including the registered manager and staff. A relative spoke positively about how staff had supported them and their loved one who had been involved with a safeguarding incident. They described how staff had informed them about the incident and felt reassured by the actions staff had taken to make sure their relative and other people were safe. We observed care records included actions taken to safeguard people and how to mitigate reoccurrences.

Staff told us care plans and risk assessments were accessible and provided good information. A staff member said, “Care plans are in the locked cupboards in each unit and we now have them online. We can always make time to read up on new people. It’s important how they like to be cared for. Every so often I pick up a folder and have a read through. If care plans are changed, they (management) let us know.”

People were enabled to take positive risks and were involved in planning to safely meet their needs and wishes. One person described how they were supported to go out into the garden when the weather was nice and had been able to work in raised beds. This was important to them as they had been an outdoors person all their life working on a farm. They said, “I usually have a staff member with me in case I fall.” A person’s relative spoke about how staff had involved them when their loved one’s mental health deteriorated. They said, “I have been involved with the mental health team meetings for [person] and know they are trying a different medication for [person].” They expressed confidence that staff were seeking advice from professionals and ensuring they were involved and included in plans for managing risks associated with mental health needs.

Where people required specific risk assessments to enable them to eat safely. We observed their meals had been prepared in accordance with the correct assessed consistency.

Risk assessments and associated care plans were detailed and provided enough information for staff to support people safely.

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

Staff were recruited safely, the management team ensured new staff had been robustly checked prior to their appointment. New staff completed an induction period and were monitored through competency checks and supervisions to ensure their knowledge was practiced and embedded.

Some staff worked a mix of shifts and were able to understand people’s day and night needs. Some staff were trained in dual roles, for example, care assistant, housekeeping and reception. This reduced the need for agency care staff and provided a continuity of care for people. Staff completed training and the registered manager sourced additional training from visiting healthcare professionals, for example, training in supporting people living with dementia and mental health. A staff member said, “I think it gave me more confidence in how to deal with situations. Dementia is such a wide spectrum, when it goes hand in hand with mental health, it (training) helps give ideas of how to say things in a different way." Since the additional training, we saw a reduction of incidents between people.

We observed staff supporting a person who was expressing their emotions, the person responded positively to their approach.

People were supported by enough trained and skilled staff, many of whom had worked at the service for many years. Comments from people included, “There is usually someone around. If you press your bell they come quickly, that’s why I came here because I couldn’t cope on my on at home, you know there is always someone here to call on.” We observed enough staff to respond to people’s requests and answer call bells promptly. Staff received training and supervision. A relative said, “The staff seem to know how to care for people, I have seen them with some more difficult people and they are very good at calming situations.”

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.