Hebburn Court 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (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. The provider had systems for logging and investigating falls, incidents, accidents and safeguarding concerns. Staff carried out a ‘root cause analysis’ following each fall to identify areas for improvement and people were consistently monitored after a fall to check on their wellbeing.

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. People’s needs had been assessed, prior to them moving into the home to ensure they could be met appropriately. A person said, “(Staff member) came to my house to ask questions to check they could cater for [specific condition].”

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

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. Where potential risks had been identified, risk assessments had been completed which detailed the action required to help keep people safe. Risk assessments had been regularly reviewed and update if required.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The provider had improved record keeping confirming they had checked fire equipment and carried out regular fire drills. Environmental risk assessments were carried out to help keep the premises safe.

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

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.

The provider did not always make sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. The provider had made some improvements since the last assessment to improve medicines management. This included accurate recording of the effectiveness of ‘as required’ medicines, the use of topical medicines, such as creams and ointments and the oversight of the use of thickeners in drinks. Medicines audits were completed regularly and were mostly effective in identifying areas for improvement. Although improvements had been made, there was still further action required. Staff were not consistently recording the actual time staff administered time critical medicines and some ‘as required guidance’ needed more personalised information. The registered manager started making the required changes immediately.