Snowdrop 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

The provider had an effective system in place to ensure that equipment and facilities were routinely serviced and maintained. During our visit, we observed one concern with regards to the safe management and storage of oxygen. This was immediately attended to by management once we drew this to their attention. Safeguarding processes in place were effective. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to potential abuse. Where referrals were needed to outside agencies, including the local authority, these were completed in a timely manner. Risks to people’s health, wellbeing and safety were identified and assessed. Records in place were clear and detailed, with staff aware of the actions they needed to take. The registered manager maintained multiple tracker records to ensure they had an overview of risks and ensure actions were taken where needed. Staff demonstrated adherence to infection prevention and control measures. The service was clean and well maintained, with frequent audits completed. Medicines were managed safely and administered in accordance with the prescriber’s instructions. Checks and audits were in place, alongside training and competency checks for staff.

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.

People told us they felt safe. A person said, “I am happy enough, staff come when I need them, they’re kind, it’s not always perfect but nothing ever is. I feel safe.”

Staff knew how to recognise, and respond to, abuse. A staff member said, “I haven’t experienced any concerns relating to abuse.” Another staff member said, “If I had any concerns, I’d report it to my team leader and home manager.” Staff confirmed they had received training and knew how to access information regarding safeguarding should they need to.

We saw staff were kind, patient and caring in their approach. People were relaxed and comfortable with staff.

The provider had a system in place to record and report any safeguarding concerns that may arise. An accurate log of any referrals made to the local authority was maintained with the outcome documented, once received. This process was supported by an up-to-date policy.

People told us they felt staff supported them safely.

Staff knew people’s individual risks and were able to tell us how they reduced those risks. For example, in relation to falls, people’s dietary needs and pressure care. They confirmed they were aware of the risk assessments in place and knew how to escalate any concerns when people’s needs may be changing.

Staff were seen to be working safely. We observed staff supporting people to move around safely, respond promptly to calls for assistance and carry out regular wellbeing checks. We observed staff using equipment safely and conversing with people throughout their support. Staff ensured people were sat up when eating, and foods were the right consistency for their needs.

People had individual risk assessments for all aspects of their care and support. These provided clear guidance to staff and were regularly reviewed. The registered manager maintained a number of ‘tracker’ records which enabled them to have oversight of risks to people. We saw that clinical meetings were held on a weekly basis to ensure that risks to be people were shared, discussed and recorded accurately. Where action was needed, the responsibility for these was clearly delegated and the registered manager checked and ‘signed off’ all actions.

People told us they felt safe and comfortable living at the service. They raised no concerns with us about the environment and confirmed they had access to all the equipment they needed.

Staff were aware of potential hazards and how to reduce these in their work. Staff had attended fire drills and had practiced evacuation protocols, should this be needed in an emergency. A staff member said, “I have done fire training and been part of fire drills.”

The environment was free from hazards and fire safety equipment was in place. People had access to call bells and the home was well maintained. However, we did find that the outside storage of oxygen cylinders was not managed safely. We raised this with the management team who took immediate remedial action to ensure it was in line with guidance.

Environmental risks were identified and assessed. However, we noted that, although individual oxygen risk assessments were in place for people where this was prescribed, the service fire risk assessment did not include the presence of oxygen. We shared this this with the registered manager and provider during feedback who confirmed they would ensure this element of risk was included in future assessments. The provider had an effective system in place to ensure that equipment and facilities were routinely serviced and maintained. Regular environmental audits were completed, with action taken when identified as needed.

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.

People’s bedrooms and communal areas were kept clean for people to enjoy.

Staff knew how to practice good infection prevention and control (IPC). A staff member said, “We have lots in place from the pandemic.”

The environment was clean, even within areas that may be at risk of being missed when cleaning was carried out. There was cleaning ongoing throughout our visit by designated staff. All staff were following correct IPC in their tasks.

IPC audits and ‘walkarounds’ were completed regularly, with an up-to-date policy and guidance in place for all staff. Where improvements were needed, these were communicated clearly with staff via an ‘incident bulletin’. The registered manager maintained a tracker with a view to having oversight of any infections at the service, including treatments underway. Lessons learnt were completed and shared following any outbreak.

People received their medicines in accordance with their needs and as the prescriber intended. We observed staff completing administration tasks safely and in a timely manner.

Staff responsible for managing medicines were aware of safe practice. The deputy manager advised us they carried out daily checks to help ensure there were no errors and people received their medicines as needed.

We checked quantities of medicines against records held and found these to be correct. Robust systems were in place to ensure safe management of medicines. These included regular training and competency checks for staff along with detailed audits.