Eleanor Nursing & Social Care Ltd - Poole Office

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 service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. People were involved in their care. The service worked with people following an accident or incident to prevent a recurrence. The registered manager told us they supported learning across the service; this had included reviewing events across the service to identify any themes and trends. Records confirmed reviews on people’s care were undertaken regularly and in accordance with the service policy.

The service 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 and their relatives told us they felt staff at the service communicated effectively with external professionals, such as the GP. Relationships between the service and external professionals were established and operating effectively, feedback collected during the inspection was positive. There were safe systems to share essential information with the necessary health and social care professionals. The service had produced a summary of people’s needs and requirements, this meant a safe transition between services, such as, for admission to hospital. A member of staff said, “This is important because this ensures the client receives holistic and safe care.”

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They 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 service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff knew how to ensure people were protected from harm and abuse. They told us how they would raise concerns both within the service and externally. Staff were confident the registered manager would follow up any concerns and make the necessary referrals to the local authority as required. People felt safe with the care they received from the service. A staff member said, “I do feel that clients are safe. I report any concerns to the office or manager, and I would contact safeguarding or the local authority if needed. I’m confident that any issues are followed up.”

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They 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 staff worked to keep them safe and understood their needs. Staff knew people well and told us they knew where to get information from. There was additional work required to embed people’s individual risk to the care provider care planning system. Not all individuals’ risks had been fully identified and updated. A plan was put into place to improve this during the inspection.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, and facilities supported the delivery of safe care. Environmental risk assessments were in place and were reviewed and updated as needed. For example, there was guidance for staff about where they could locate emergency shut-offs for water and gas. People told us they felt safe. Staff had received training on using equipment correctly, for example, equipment used to help people move around their home.

The service 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 they were happy with the staff who visited them. Staff were complimentary about their colleagues and told us they worked well as a team. The service had a thorough induction and shadowing process for all new starters. Recruitment processes were established and operated effectively; staff were recruited safely. Procedures were in place to ensure the required checks were completed prior to staff commencing their employment. This included enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Support for staff was ongoing and there was a schedule of supervisions and spot checks, records showed the conversations were 2-way and detailed. Staff told us they were supported by the registered manager.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Staff had access to the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) as needed and supplies were available to them. Policies and procedures were robust regarding preventing the spread of infection. Staff had received training and ongoing monitoring for infection prevention and control. A staff member said, “I always have PPE and it is always available to me. If supplies run low, we inform the office and they restock promptly.”

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened. Care plans correctly reflected the level of support a person required with their medicines. Staff had training and competency checks to support them with administering medicines safely. Medicine audits had not correctly identified where there had been medicines errors or concerns. Medicines alerts had been closed without the correct action having been taken. For example, medication not being available and not being able to be administered and incorrect recording by staff. The registered manager responded immediately by putting additional support and training in place to strengthen these processes. Where medicines were prescribed to be taken ‘when required’ there was not always personalised information in place to guide staff. Action was taken immediately by the service to improve this. The service communicated with the GP and pharmacy to ensure people had the right medicines at the right time.