Dovecote Manor 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

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 identify and embed good practice.

For example, the provider monitored safety events and tracked any required actions until completion. The manager held weekly clinical risk meetings with the team, ensuring that staff were aware of people’s risk and to discuss lessons learnt.

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 saw evidence of appropriate referrals, for example, to speech and language therapy and dietitians where this was required.

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.

Staff had received appropriate safeguarding training and were aware of their responsibilities. A staff member told us that safeguarding was making sure people were safe and that they felt comfortable to speak up if they had concerns.

Relatives told us they were happy with their relative’s safety at Dovecote Manor Care Home.

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.

We saw risk assessments in place and these were reviewed regularly. People had person centred support plans in place which enabled staff to support them with their individual needs, and wellbeing.

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

We observed a hot food trolley being used in the corridor for food service, the trolley was left unattended. The hot food trolley was hot to the touch, this put people at risk of harm.

The provider responded swiftly when this concern was brought to their attention. They conducted a risk assessment and moved the hot food trolley into the dining room where staff were present when it was in use.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. However, staff we spoke with told us that they needed more staff to be able to support people’s changing needs.

One relative told us, “Sometimes I don’t think there is enough staff. Weekends are short sometimes.”

The provider used a dependency tool to assess staffing levels, and in response to this feedback the provider promptly reviewed staffing.

During our assessment we observed enough staff on duty and people’s needs were being met.

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.

The environment was clean. We observed staff washing their hands and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when supporting people.

The provider did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

Records did not evidence people’s prescribed topical medicines were always administered as prescribed. This could increase health risks to people. We observed topical medicines were not always dated when opened. This increased the risk of people receiving medicines that were no longer safe for use or effective.

Protocols for medicines which were administered ‘when required’ (PRN) did not always give clear guidance to staff. For example, what signs to observe when a person could not say when they were in discomfort or pain.

However, the manager responded swiftly when these concerns were brought to their attention, including developing PRN protocols, auditing all topical creams and implementing topical cream medication administration records (TMAR) on the providers electronic recordings system used by staff.