Riverview 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

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually to identify and embed good practice. Accidents and incidents were being recorded by staff with clear details of what had occurred and what had happened in response. Accidents and incidents were analysed by management monthly with lessons learnt reviews in place. The manager told us they have an open and honest culture, and they act and investigate any safety concerns reported to them. Staff told us they could raise concerns around safety if required. One staff member told us, “The manager is approachable and listens to us.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. We found that effective systems were mainly in place to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to service users and keep them safe. People told us the transition to the home had been good with no concerns. One person told us, “I feel safe here, I have no concerns.”.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect.

The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. The manager knew their responsibilities and duties to identify and report safeguarding concerns. The home had a safeguarding policy in place which supported safe and effective practices to ensure people were protected from harm or abuse.

During our assessment we found safeguarding concerns were investigated and responded to. The required statutory notifications had been submitted. The manager had worked closely with the Local Authority and put in place an action plan to be completed following recent safeguarding concerns. A full investigation had been completed, and appropriate action had been taken. The manager also ensured they were open and transparent throughout the process. The manager had recently enrolled staff into some enhanced training regarding safeguarding and speaking up. Staff knew how to report abuse. Comments included, “We have had recent training on reporting concerns we know to speak up if we have any concerns” and “We can tell the managers if we have any concerns. They will investigate then.”
 

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Managers and staff demonstrated a good understanding of how people's needs and risks should be managed. Managers told us following some recent changes in management they had reviewed all people’s needs and reviewed all care plans to ensure they were up to date. People told us they were involved in planning and reviewing their care. One relative told us, “[Manager] is marvellous, a first-class manager, they involve us in everything with [Name]’s care needs, we are so involved. They are approachable and supportive managers here.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. During our assessment inspectors did not observe any concerns with the environment. The service had appropriate policies and procedures in place. There was an environmental risk assessment and audit in place with actions that had been completed. Mandatory safety checks had been completed. Health and safety checks had been completed in line with the nationally recognised timeframes.

There were enough suitably deployed staff to meet people’s needs. People did not raise any concerns in relation to staffing. People told us, “Staff are always around”, “There always seems to be enough staff about, sometimes I use the call bell, and they always come”, “There are usually enough staff around” and “Yes, there's enough staff around, [Name] has a buzzer and a sensor mat in their room if they move around, it alerts the staff and they are not falling as much here”. Managers told us they now also cover the weekends to ensure a manager is present at the service. Staff files showed that staff were mainly recruited safely with most mandatory checks completed. However, some staff files were incomplete and information was missing. The provider’s training matrix identified that staff are not up to date with a lot of the required mandatory training.

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. There was an infection control policy and process in place. The management team were clear on the infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures and their responsibility to provide personal protective equipment (PPE). People did not raise any concerns in relation to infection prevention and control. Comments included, “The home is very clean and well maintained, there are never unpleasant smells” and “Very clean home, I have never seen anything unclean.”

The provider did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. People prescribed ‘as and when needed’ (PRN) medicines had PRN protocols in place but these required further detail to ensure they were person-centred. During the assessment we found that PRN medication administration records (MAR) were not always completed. For example, staff were not signing to say the medicines were not required. The provider was in the processes of changing to an electronic medication system and electronic medication administration records. Plans were in place to ensure staff received training regarding this. The provider had good measures in place to ensure people were getting their medicines on time. Medicines were stored appropriately and safely following a recent pharmacy. The home currently partakes in monthly medicines audits.