Shirley View Nursing 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 and those important to them were supported to understand safeguarding and how to raise concerns when they didn’t feel safe. Staff understood their duty to protect people from abuse and knew how and when to report any concerns they had to managers. When concerns had been raised, managers reported these promptly to the relevant agencies and worked proactively with them, to make sure timely action was taken to safeguard people from further risk. There was a clear understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and this was only used when it was in the best interest of the person. Safety risks to people were managed well. Managers assessed and reviewed safety risks to people regularly and made sure people and those important to them, were involved in making decisions about how they wished to be supported to stay safe. Staff were provided with up to date information about how to manage identified risk to people and understood how to reduce safety risks, to keep people safe from injury or harm. There were enough staff to support people with their needs. Managers reviewed staffing levels regularly to make sure there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff on duty at all times. Staff received relevant training to meet the range of people’s needs at the service. They were well supported through supervision and appraisal to continuously learn and improve their working practice. Managers made sure recruitment checks were undertaken on all staff to make sure only those that were deemed suitable and fit, would be employed to support people at the service.

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.

Managers supported staff to safeguard people from abuse and staff had received relevant training to do so. Staff understood how to recognise abuse and how to report any concerns they had to managers. One staff member said, “I have to look at people and how they are and if there any changes in their emotions or physical signs such as bleeding and bruising I would report this immediately to the manager. I feel the manager would do the right thing and report it and investigate it.” The registered manager told us they encouraged a culture at the service where people, relatives and staff could raise concerns without fear about what might happen. They said, “I make sure staff are aware of safeguarding policies and they have the information they need to report concerns. I encourage people and relatives to come in to the office and speak to me if they are worried about anything. I try and build trust with the staff team so they feel confident coming to me and raising concerns. I make sure that I discuss any concerns with people and everyone involved in their care and reassure people that we are here to look after them and make sure they are safe.”

Records showed safeguarding concerns reported to the registered manager were recorded in detail and reported promptly to the relevant agencies. The registered manager worked well with these agencies and acted in a timely way to make sure people were safeguarded and protected from further risk. People and those important to them were involved in this process and informed about what action would be taken to keep people safe. People’s care records showed the service was working within the principles of the MCA and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty. Any conditions related to DoLS authorisations were being met.

People were safe at the service. People told us they felt safe and they had no concerns about the staff supporting them. One person said, “I feel safe here. I feel safe with the staff. The staff are alright. The look after me.” Another person told us, “The staff are very good. The whole place is very good. It’s a lovely place. I feel quite safe here.” A relative said, “I don’t feel [family member] is at risk of abuse here. When I walk away I have no anxiety. I just know [family member] is fine.” Another relative told us, “All the staff are lovely. I have peace of mind and I have no fear about the safety of people.” People said they knew how to raise concerns if they didn’t feel safe. One person said, “If I was worried about something I can trust them [staff] and speak to them.”

People’s care records contained current information about identified risks to their safety. This meant staff had up to date information about the action they should take to manage these risks and keep people safe.

Staff received relevant training to help them keep people safe at the service. This included training on equipment used to support people, for example, hoists to help people move and transfer safely. The registered nurse said, “I observe people and use this to inform people’s care records and risk assessments and our plans for how people will be supported to reduce these. For example, we are getting in the right equipment and staff know how to use this properly. We have regular training on the equipment and on moving and handling.” Staff understood risks posed to people and explained to us in detail, the action they would take to reduce the risk of injury or harm, so that people could do the things that mattered to them.

Risks to people’s safety were managed well, with no unnecessary restrictions. One person said, “Staff are generally looking out for me and making sure I am safe.” A relative told us, “The way they monitor [family member] - they move and [staff] are there. The staff are very alert. I think that helps people to move about safely.” Another relative said, “I know from coming here there are 5 people that move around a lot. But the staff are always close by and keeping an eye on people when they are moving, so all areas are covered.”

We observed people were supported to do the things they wanted to do and staff helped them to do this safely. For example, when one person wanted to take part in an activity, staff made sure they could move safely to where this was taking place. Staff were kind and patient and explained to the person what they were doing and made sure the person understood they did not have to rush and could move at their own pace.

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

There were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff to support people. People said the staff team worked well together. A relative told us, “I’ve been here on the weekdays and on a weekend and it’s always fully staffed. There is never a moment when I think there are not enough staff.” Another relative said, “I think the quality of staff are all really good. They know the residents, they know their needs and interact with them very well. I have seen new staff and they seem proactive and doing jobs and tasks rather than clock watching.”

Staff received regular and relevant training to support them in their roles and they were well supported by managers to learn and continuously improve their working practice. One staff member said, “I am up to date with my training. Supervision is positive and helps me and motivates me in terms of my job. I feel very well supported by the manager. I think there are enough of us here as well.” The registered nurse told us, “I think the staff are well trained here. I am up to date with training. We are full of training! I get regular supervision and appraisal. I find these are good because it helps me improve. I can also talk about any concerns and I feel well supported by the manager. I also think there are enough staff here.” The registered manager told us they regularly reviewed staffing levels at the service to make sure there were always enough staff to meet people’s needs.

Managers used staffing dependency tools to make sure there were always enough staff to meet people’s needs safely. The registered manager showed us how by using these tools, they were able to identify that one person needed extra support from staff, on a 1-2-1 basis, and was able to have this put in place quickly, which helped keep the person and others safer. Managers carried out checks on staff that applied to work at the service to make sure they were suitable to support people. This included checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) who provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Training records showed staff attended relevant courses to support them to meet a range of people’s needs. Training was refreshed at regular intervals so that staff stayed up to date with current practice. Supervision and appraisal records showed staff had regular supervision meetings and an annual appraisal with the registered manager to support them in their role and to identify any further training or learning they might need.

We observed people did not have to wait long for support from staff when they needed this. Staff were vigilant when people were moving around or undertaking activities and made sure people remained safe. Staff regularly checked in on people who chose to spend time in their rooms or in quieter spaces around the service to make sure people were well and ask if they needed anything.

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.