Sophia Care Home

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 kept safe from avoidable harm because staff knew them well and understood how to protect them from abuse. The service worked well with other agencies to do so. The service had enough staff, including for one-to-one support for people to take part in activities. People lived safely and free from unwarranted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored and managed safety well. People were involved in managing risks to themselves and in taking decisions about how to keep safe.

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 were relaxed during our visit, people were able to communicate with staff and let them know either through verbal communication or body language how they were feeling. Relatives told us they felt the home was a safe place. They stated that if they had concerns about safety, they would let the staff and managers know.

Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and how and who to report to if they had concerns about the safety of a person. They attended safeguarding training and were aware of the local authority safeguarding team. A staff member told us, “Safeguarding is protecting people from harm. Abuse can be in many forms like financial, neglect, sexual and psychological. If you see or suspect or have been told about abuse, report the abuse you need to tell the manager."

People were comfortable around staff and there was a natural relaxed atmosphere. We observed staff use their judgement to make sure that people were kept safe. For example, one person was reminded by staff to use safety equipment when going out in the community.

The provider had a clear safeguarding process in place. Safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures/policies were in place. Staff received training in safeguarding to ensure they had knowledge and confidence in dealing with any safeguarding concerns. At the time of our inspection there were no safeguarding concerns.

People told us they were able to make choices about their care. Some people said they were aware of hazards for example using the oven or hob. Relatives told us that staff knew people very well and could meet their needs. Relatives said they were involved in care planning and reviews.

Staff and leaders had a clear understating of risk management and how to mitigate risks. Staff were able to explain clearly how to support people in a safe way. For example, when using equipment, it needs first to be checked for any defects. This meant people could be confident that they would be supported in a safe way.

We observed staff and people interacting and noted that staff were aware of risks to people health and wellbeing. For example, staff reminded people about hazards in the home and the need to be careful.

The provider had a process in place for assessing risks. Prior to moving into the home, the provider carried out an assessment. Once risks were identified the provider put control measures in place to mitigate the risks as much as possible. Risk plans we sampled had guidance in place for staff to follow. However, in 2 risk plans we noted the provider had recorded a significant amount of information and it became a little unclear what the actions should be. This meant that staff, particularly if they were new, might not have clear information to care for people.

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 and relative’s told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Everyone we spoke with expressed how happy they were with the staff team as a whole. People and relatives made comments such as the staff are very caring, keep us up to date with information and are always on hand for support.

Staff told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they felt they were well trained for the role. Staff and leaders told us they had regular support meetings which meant they could check how things were going and seek out support/guidance when needed.

During our visit, we saw that there was enough qualified staff on duty to meet people’s needs. People were relaxed and staff were attentive. When people wanted to be supported staff responded without delay. Staff were approachable and caring.

The provider had a clear safe recruitment process in place. All employees were subject to background checks. These included criminal records checks. This meant people could be assured staff had been fully vetted before starting in their role. The provider had a training and induction program in place. This meant staff received regular refresher training which enabled them to do their jobs more effectively.

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.