Anley Hall 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 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager had a positive culture of safety and learning, based on openness, reflection and a shared commitment to improvement. Staff and leaders recorded accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns and ensured these were notified to the local authority and CQC when required. The registered manager reviewed each event and identified immediate actions, so staff knew what to and learn from incidents.

The registered manager worked with people and partner organisations to maintain safe systems of care and support, including when people had complex needs. Pre‑admission and ongoing assessments were detailed and person centred, and care plans for people with higher risks, such as choking, seizures or the use of bed rails, contained clear guidance for staff on how to reduce risk. One visiting professional told us, “I have worked with Anley Hall for around eight years. We generally have a very positive experience with Anley Hall.”

The registered manager worked with people, relatives and partner agencies to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Safeguarding concerns were referred appropriately to the local authority and notified to CQC. Staff knew how to escalate concerns and described feeling confident that leaders would take prompt action; this was supported by positive feedback from the local authority, which reported a good working relationship.

The service involved people and their relatives in decisions about risks and how their care and support were organised. People and families told us they felt safe and well cared for, and a relative said they would recommend the service because staff were “very kind and caring” and knew the person well. Risk assessments for people we reviewed were person centred, sensitive and regularly updated, and staff used people’s histories and preferences to plan activities, including for people living with dementia who could not always attend group sessions.

The registered manager detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.The environment was clean, tidy and free from malodour, and people’s rooms were personalised, so they felt homely. A wide range of environmental checks were completed and up to date. Despite the challenges of the service being in a Grade II converted building, the provider had worked hard to ensure the premises were adapted to be fully suitable for people’s care and mobility needs.

The provider ensured there were enough staff with the right skills and experience to provide safe care. Staffing levels significantly exceeded those indicated by the provider’s dependency assessment tool which had a positive impact on people. Staff were observed responding promptly to call bells and emergencies. Recruitment checks for new staff were all completed and there was a stable, long‑standing staff team who spoke positively about working at the service. Staff received regular supervision and a training programme that covered key topics, with most mandatory training up to date. Strengthening was needed around the training volunteers received where they provided some practical support to people. The registered manager gave assurances this would be put in place promptly following the inspection.

The service maintained a clean and hygienic environment and followed infection prevention and control guidance. Staff practices showed appropriate use of protective equipment and safe handling of food, with meals brought covered on serving trays and tables laid with condiments and cloth protectors. The registered manager completed regular infection prevention and control and hand hygiene audits to ensure consistent high standards.

The registered manager ensured people’s medicines were managed safely and made sure they received their medicines as prescribed. Staff followed secure processes for controlled drugs, with appropriate storage, records and regular checks. Care plans and medicines records showed staff understood people’s medicines support needs, including the use of covert administration for some people, and inspectors observed safe practice when staff administered medicines. However, ‘as and when required’ medicines (PRN) protocols were not as detailed as expected. The provider gave assurances this would be resolved following the inspection.