Florence House

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. We assessed a total of 7 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last assessment, which was requires improvement. At this assessment this key question 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 manager told us they had several training resources and implemented a new eLearning system. Staff were provided with face-to-face training and had their competency checked with such things as medicines management, moving and handling and infection prevention control practices. One member of staff said, “I had lots of training when I first started and continue to do so.”

The manager had processes in place to learn from accidents, incidents and safeguarding at the service. Staff had received training in how to report any issues and had the systems available to them to raise alerts directly with senior staff. The manager fully investigated any issues and lessons learned or changes needed to practice was implemented. Information was shared with staff through supervisions, and staff meetings.

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.

People were protected from the risk of abuse and told us they felt safe using the service. One person said, “I feel safe here, this is my home.”

Staff understood how to recognise the signs of abuse and could describe the actions they would take to safeguard people. This action included informing other agencies if they were concerned about action being taken. A staff member told us, “I would report to my manager, and I would escalate to the local authority if I needed to.”

During the onsite visit, we observed staff responded to support people promptly. Staff supported people to move safely using assessed equipment where required.

The manager told us they had safeguarding policies and procedures in place and had a clear approach for ‘whistle blowing’. Safeguarding was discussed during meetings and supervision to ensure staff knew how to safeguard people and how important this was to their role. The manager had raised safeguarding concerns appropriately and had worked with the local authority to investigate these to ensure people were being safeguarded.

A person told us they were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Care plans were clear and provided staff with sufficient guidance to keep people safe. There were sufficient and appropriately trained staff in place to support people.

Staff knew the risks to people well and told us they were kept up to date if there had been any changes to risk assessments. Staff completed health and safety, including fire safety checks of the environment to help ensure risks were mitigated as far as possible.

People were involved in planning their care and managing risks. Care plan and risk assessments were person centred and aimed to provide positive outcomes for people whilst maintaining their choice and independence.

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

People were positive about the staff support they received and told us there were enough suitably qualified staff to support them. A person told us, “I like the staff here, they know what they are doing.”

Staff told us they were happy working at the service and with the support they received from the manager. A member of staff told us, “There are enough staff working here. We can always take the residents out and about if we need to as there are enough of us working.”

There were enough staff supporting people at the service during our site visit. People using the service received support as needed and required. The numbers and skills of staff matched the needs of people using the service.

New staff had a full induction which included face to face training and shadowing more experienced staff. Staff were supported with supervision meetings and senior staff completed observations of their performance. The manager was supportive of staff developing their skills with nationally recognised qualifications and sourced external training for staff to enhance their skills. Appropriate checks were in place before staff started work including providing full work histories, references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. DBS provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

Staff confirmed they received infection prevention and control (IPC) training and felt confident to support people with their personal care.

People were supported by staff who had received training in how to manage infection prevention and control. Staff had personal protection equipment situated throughout the service giving them easy access to wear when needed. The service was clean and tidy with no odours and people commented on how clean they found the service.

Infection prevention and control processes were in place and seen to be followed. Staff had received training and were aware of the policies and procedures in place.

People did not have any concerns with how their medicines were administered. People were given their medicines safely and as prescribed, and it was recorded on their medicine administration record (MAR).

Staff had received training in managing medicines and had their competency checked. A member of staff told us, “I had my medicines training, and my manager carried out observations and checked my competency.”

The provider had a medicine management policy in place for staff to follow and all staff received training. If people were being supported with medicines an electronic medicine administration chart was put in place. This contained all the information staff needed to safely support people with medicines.