Meadowyrthe

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Relatives told us the provider was open and honest. They told us the provider kept them informed when people experienced accidents or incidents. One relative said, “When [My family member] experienced a fall, the provider notified us. The provider always keeps us updated, they always let us know.”

Staff told us incidents and accidents were discussed and shared openly with the team. One staff member said, “During handover we discuss any accidents or near misses and we discuss how we will continue to safely monitor the person concerned.”

The provider investigated incidents and accidents and identified lessons learnt to reduce the risk of recurrence. Where complaints were received, the provider followed these up appropriately and shared outcomes with all relevant persons.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored.

People told us they felt safe living in the home. One person said, “I do feel safe living here. The staff listen to me and help me as best they can.”

Relatives told us people were safely assessed. One relative said, “I was told about [my family member’s] assessment with the consultant. They [the provider] keep me informed and I feel involved.”

Visiting professionals told us they had received positive feedback from people living in the home. One visiting professional told us, “We have placed people at Meadowyrthe over the past few months and during the review meetings we have with people, they tell us they no concerns and are happy living there.”

Staff told us they provided safe care to people living in the home. One staff member told us, “I would say people are safe living here, all staff have to read the care plans and get to know people and support them safely.”

Risks to people were managed safely. Initial assessments took place with people new to the service and people’s needs were regularly assessed.

Where people displayed distressed behaviours there were risk assessments in place. However, these risk assessments required further depth to clearly describe strategies for staff to follow. The provider told us they had already identified this as an area for improvement and had produced an action plan detailing how these risk assessments would improve. They shared their action plan with us; this demonstrated the provider was proactive and open to areas of improvement and planned how they were going to address this prior to inspection.

The provider did not always share concerns quickly and appropriately.

Whilst the provider raised safeguarding concerns appropriately with the local authority, some concerns were not acted upon in a timely manner. For example, 1 concern was passed on to a member of the management team and actions were taken immediately to keep the person safe. However, a safeguarding concern was not raised with the local authority until 2 days later, neither was this concern passed on to a member of the senior management straight away in accordance with the provider’s policy. The person was unharmed, and the registered manager carried out an investigation into this delay. The provider spoke to the member of the management team to remind them of the importance of passing on concerns to all relevant agencies promptly. Furthermore, as part of lessons learnt additional training was arranged for all staff.

People and relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns and complaints with the provider. One person told us, “I know how to complain, but I have not complained yet.” One relative told us they had raised a complaint and explained their concerns were dealt with and resolved quickly.

Relatives told us they felt their family member’s received safe care.

Staff received safeguarding training and were confident about reporting abuse. One staff member said, “I would escalate any concerns to the registered manager, regional manager or the local authority safeguarding team."

Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

People told us they could make their own choice and decisions, and staff supported them to follow their interest and hobbies. One person told us they chose to eat their meals alone in their room. They said, “Staff try and ask me to come out into the dining room, but I prefer to eat here.” We observed how staff encouraged this person to join other people in the communal rooms but ultimately respected their decision.

Staff told us they respected people’s choices even if they knew their choices may not be the healthiest option. One staff member said, “Some people choose to smoke, or they want to stay in bed all day but all we can do is encourage them. We must respect their choices.”

Care plans and daily notes were in place to manage risks relating to people's health and risk assessments were in place to manage or mitigate risks relating to people's care needs.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment.

Health and safety checks had taken place by both the provider and external contactors. However, there were some gaps in the providers fire safety monitoring records, such as fire alarm testing. The provider told us they believed these had taken place, but this was a recording issue. They responded to our feedback by putting new systems in place to monitor these checks on a weekly basis.

Relatives told us the environment was safe. However, some relatives commented over the home appearing tired and needed refurbishment. One relative said, “Some areas in the home look run down.”

Staff told us they monitored the environment for potential trip hazards. One staff member said, “We have to make sure everything is put away safely and monitor for any potential trip hazards such as leads.”

We observed staff using equipment such as hoists safely and storing equipment away safely. We observed a fault light flashing on an airflow mattress and reported this to a member of staff. The staff member explained they had already noticed and logged this with maintenance and reported it to the registered manager. We checked and found this had been logged and the issue was resolved on the same day.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

People told us staff were available to assist them when required. One person told us, “The staff are lovely. They are here to help me. Whenever I need them [staff], they are always there. Always happy and smiling.”

Relatives said there were enough staff to monitor people safely. One relative said, “There seems to be enough staff. They [staff] always making sure someone is in the lounge at all times.” Another relative told us, “Staff always very greet me very warmly, they are always welcoming. I can’t fault them [staff], they are always really friendly.”

We received mixed feedback from staff regarding staffing levels, some staff felt there was enough staff on duty, whereas other staff told us they felt more staff were needed. However, staff told us about 2 new activity co-ordinators who had recently started employment and how this had assisted with staffing levels in the day and increased people’s wellbeing.

Staff told us they received comprehensive training from the provider. One staff member said, “I've done online and face to face training. We have in-depth training.” They went on to provide examples of how some training courses had assisted them to empathise with people and their experiences.

Our observations found staff responded to people’s requests quickly and respectfully. When call bells were activated by people in their bedrooms, we observed staff responding to these promptly.

Staff rotas were in place and the management used a staffing dependency tool. A dependency tool can help a provider identify how many staff members are needed each day and time.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Relatives told us people lived in a clean environment. One relative said, “The home is always clean, it always smells nice.”

Staff told us about the importance of maintaining a clean environment. One staff member said, “It's important to clean regularly and wear the correct personal protective equipment [PPE] to stop the risk of infection.” We observed staff cleaning and wearing appropriate PPE.

The provider told us they had renovated some areas of the home and plans were in place to renovate areas of the home.

Audits and checks were in place to demonstrate how the provider monitored infection prevention control safely.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

People told us staff supported them to receive their medicines safely. One person said, “Staff always remind me about my medicines, they ask if I am in pain, and they get me a doctor if I need one.”

Staff told us when medicines errors occurred, they had their competencies rechecked and carried out a reflective account so they could learn from the error. The provider told us this was important to ensure staff learnt from their mistakes positively and shared their learning across the team.

Medicines were administered safely. Where people required time sensitive medicines these were appropriately managed. People were offered pain relief medication, in accordance with their preferences and health professional guidance. Where people required controlled medicines, these were stored and administered safely.

Where medicines were stored in the fridge, the fridge temperature was taken daily, and the temperatures remained within the safe temperature limits. However, the provider was not recording the maximum and minimum temperatures as required to ensure medicines are stored at the correct temperature throughout the day. The provider responded to our feedback and introduced a new system of recording. In addition, they sent us the new recordings following the site visit and they put an information sheet up near the fridge to remind staff.