The Poets

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 received safe person-centred care. Safeguarding procedures protected people from abuse. Medicines were managed and administered safely. There were enough skilled staff to ensure people’s safety and meet their needs. People were involved in decisions about their safety and wellbeing. Risk management processes supported people’s safety, independence and wishes.

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.

People felt included in discussion about their care and wellbeing. Learning from incidents and accidents was discussed with people to mitigate a recurrence. A person told us,” Ladies come round and make sure we are ok. It’s well organised really.” People felt able to talk to staff about safety concerns. A person said, “One’s concerns are always considered.”

There were opportunities for staff and leaders to learn lessons and improve outcomes for people. Staff knew how to report accidents and incidents and said these were discussed in handovers and team meetings. Senior staff and leaders told us they used shared learning to improve people’s care experiences and to drive service improvements and safety.

Processes supported a culture of safety and learning. Accidents were appropriately reported and acted upon. Lessons were learnt from safety incidents and learning was used to support people in a safer way. Meeting minutes reflected everyone was encouraged to raise concerns and ideas.

People felt involved in planning their care and treatment plans. A family member said, “They do a good job.” People told us they saw a variety of health and social care professionals to support their health and wellbeing. They told us information was shared appropriately between services. A person said, “It all goes with me.” This ensured people received continuity of care across health and social care settings.

People received holistic assessments prior to moving to The Poets. This was to ensure the care home could meet people’s needs safely and well. A member of staff said, “We have to make sure we have the right equipment and skills to support people well.” Staff told us there were regular opportunities to discuss changes in people’s care and well-being. They said this was important because, “We want people to feel confident that The Poets is the best place for them.”

We received positive feedback from partners about people’s support pathways. Feedback informed us staff were kind and considerate. They showed compassion and understanding when supporting people and families through changes in people’s care journeys.

Information about people was kept up to date. Processes enabled care records to be updated in a timely way and changes shared promptly. Auditing processes were in place to check the accuracy and quality of this information. Partnership working was promoted and encouraged. These processes enabled shared learning and kept people safe.

People felt safe and protected from harm. People were consistently positive about the staff and the way they were treated. Staff were described as “Kind and Attentive,” and people told us they were looked after well. People knew how to report a concern and said they felt confident to do so. A person said, “I’ve had no need to. They’re all very kind, it’s a safe place.’ Another person said. “I feel very safe because of the kindness and care that’s given to me.”

Staff were aware of their responsibility to report concerns. Staff were knowledgeable about the types of abuse and how to recognise these. Records showed staff reported concerns to the most senior person on duty. Staff told us they felt comfortable to do this and were confident they would be listened to.

We saw positive engagement and interactions between staff and people. People were spoken to in a respectful manner and were provided with choices. People were comfortable approaching staff when they needed support, and we saw their wishes, decisions and choices were listened to and respected.

Processes were in place to protect people from harm and abuse. Processes were open and transparent and supported by a robust safeguarding policy and positive risk management. Safeguarding concerns were reported and investigated appropriately. Staff received regular safeguarding training and competency checks to ensure their knowledge and practice was up to date.

People told us they were consulted about risks to them. Relatives said they were involved in planning and reviewing their loved one’s safety. Risk management processes supported people’s independence including any equipment they needed to do this safely. Risks relating to people’s health, nutrition and skin integrity were effectively managed. Records showed falls prevention plans had reduced the number of falls people experienced.

Staff supported people to be involved in conversations about risks to them. A staff member said, “Sometimes people need a little encouragement and support to help keep them safe.” Staff told us risks were discussed during handovers and team meetings. Staff followed people’s individual risk management plans to ensure people were supported in a safe and person-centred way.

We observed a failure to follow national safety guidance for the safe storage of food/fluid thickening powder. The guidance raises awareness of the risk of asphyxiation by accidental ingestion. We observed several tubs of thickening powder in people’s bedroom and in communal areas that were not stored safely. We signposted nurses and the manager to this guidance and action was taken to store the powder safely.

There was not an effective process for checking the implementation of patient safety alerts issued by NHS England. Processes were in place to ensure staff had access to people’s risk management plans. Records showed these were reviewed and updated regularly. Safety decisions made in people’s best interests followed proper guidance. People had personal evacuation plans which guided staff to support them safely in case of emergency.

People lived in an environment that was safe. People told us the service was designed well with safety in mind. They particularly liked the wide hallways and open plan communal areas. A person said, “There is always a seat close by which is handy.” Another person said, “Everything is accessible, even the garden. The lighting is excellent. It makes getting around so much easier”

Staff told us the building was designed and maintained well. Staff had an awareness of their own responsibilities to ensure the building and equipment were safe to use. They knew how to undertake safety checks and how to report concerns.

We observed staff using overhead hoists in people’s bedrooms. On each occasion staff were required to fit a battery pod to the overhead tracking rail. This was because there were insufficient battery pods for each hoist to have its own. Some staff required a step ladder to do this. On both assessment days we observed a step ladder left in the middle of a person’s bedroom when not in use. Risks assessments did not demonstrate all risks associated with sharing, removal and fitting of battery pods had been considered. We provided feedback to the manager about our observations. Following the assessment the manager provided assurances these risks had been considered and mitigated.

Processes were in place to keep the environment safe. There was a regular program of health and safety audits and checks, including those for gas, fire, and water safety. Processes were in place to report and respond to building and equipment safety concerns in a timely way. Risk management processes were in place for emergency situations.

We received mixed feedback about staffing. Some people did not feel there were enough staff, particularly at weekends and mealtimes. This largely reflected the experiences of people who used call bells. Comments included, “There’s less staff at the weekends and you wait longer.” And “Mealtimes are difficult if you want anything. At night it’s worse.” Some people shared positive experiences. A person said, “Definitely (enough staff), and they are all very good.” Another person said, “You do wait, but there’s no problem. They’re always happy and cheerful when they respond to you.”

Staff said there were enough skilled staff to meet people’s needs safely. They told us the rota was managed well and ensured safe staffing levels were maintained at all times. In response to concern raised about call bell waiting times, ancillary staff had been trained to provide support with non-personal care needs during busy periods. Staff were positive about their induction and training and said it provided them with the skills and knowledge to undertake their role.

We saw there were enough staff to meet people’s needs safely. Staffing levels reflected the planned rota. There was enough staff to support people with activities and with their care needs.

Safe employment processes protected people from the recruitment of unsuitable staff. Appropriate checks were made to ensure nurses were fit to practice. Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) checks provided information about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. Checks on overseas staff ensured they were safe to work with people and had the correct authorisation to work in the UK. Gaps in employment histories were explored and suitable references obtained. This information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

People were protected from the risk of infection. People knew what infection and prevention control (IPC) was and why it was important. People told us staff wore gloves and aprons when they were supporting them with personal care. One person said, “It’s always clean here.” Another person told us, “The maintenance is second to none and all the rooms are clean.”

Staff received training on IPC. They were knowledgeable about how to keep good standards of hygiene and sanitation and how to prevent the spread of infections. Staff knowledge and practice had been effective in preventing a recent infection outbreak spreading to more people. Staff told us personal protective equipment (PPE) was readily available to them.

We saw staff wore PPE appropriately during the assessment. There were ample stocks of PPE around the service. The environment was clean, and furnishings and equipment were in good order. Staff demonstrated good food hygiene practices.

The provider had an up-to-date infection control policy. Staff received training in IPC and food hygiene to mitigate the risk of infection outbreaks. IPC audits were undertaken regularly, and actions airing were addressed. There was a robust cleaning schedule that ensured regular sanitation of the environment. Processes were in place to record and report infection outbreaks appropriately.

People had person centred medicine plans. This enabled people to receive their medicines safely and in line with their preferences. People told us their medicines were managed well. Comments included, “I get it at regular intervals. If I need pain relief, I can ask any time or I can see the nurse.” And “They know what they’re doing. I’ve got no reason to complain about that.’ Where people preferred to manage their medicines themselves processes were in place to support them to do so safely.

Nurses administered medicines safely. Their practice was supported by training and competency checks. Nurses demonstrated a knowledge of people’s individual needs, including when to give ‘as and when required (PRN) medicines. Care staff recognised and appropriately reported when people might require PRN medicines including those for pain relief or to stabilise people’s blood sugars.

Processes were not robust to consider the safe storage of oxygen. We observed three oxygen cylinders stored in a person’s wardrobe alongside items of their clothing. Safe practice guidelines for oxygen requires it to be stored in a well-ventilated area, away from flammable and consumable materials and not covered by items of clothing. Following the assessment the provider notified us of the changes they had made to store oxygen safely. This was supported by an up dated risk assessment. People received their medicines in a person-centred way. Medicine administration records (MARs) were completed in line with good practice guidance. Medicines were ordered and disposed of safely and there were sufficient stocks to enable people to receive medicines as prescribed. There were clear protocols for administering PRN medicines and regular medicine checks and audits.