Bryony Lodge 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 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 in place to record accidents and incidents, and the action taken to minimise potential future risk. Learning was embedded through reflective practice and partnership working. The registered manager actively engaged with external professionals, including GPs, district nurses, the local authority and commissioners, to review care and respond to any concerns.

There was a strong emphasis on learning from events, feedback and best practice, which supported continuous improvement and helped to sustain a safe service.

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.

Records showed referrals to external healthcare professionals including district nurses and occupational health therapists were made in a timely manner. People’s electronic care plans had the ability to create hospital passports, providing healthcare professionals with current and detailed information to support the person at the time of an emergency.

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.

People were protected from avoidable harm and told us they felt safe living at the home. All staff had completed mandatory safeguarding training and there were clear safeguarding policies in place.

Where it was necessary to restrict people’s liberty to keep them safe, the provider ensured that Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications were submitted to the relevant local authority in line with legislation, protecting people’s rights. The registered manager maintained effective oversight of DoLS applications, authorisations and any associated conditions.

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.

Environmental and individual risks were clearly identified and effectively managed. Risk assessments detailed the actions required to reduce risks and supported staff to keep people safe. These records were regularly reviewed to ensure they remained accurate, complete, and up to date.

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 environment was clean and well maintained. The provider completed and reviewed health and safety checks regularly. The registered manager completed daily walk arounds of the service to ensure any potential risks were picked up on in a timely manner and escalated to the maintenance team.

The provider 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.

Strong recruitment and interview processes were in place to support the safe appointment of staff. These included obtaining references from previous employers and carrying out relevant checks to ensure applicants were suitable to work with vulnerable adults.

Staff were provided with comprehensive training across a broad range of topics to enable them to perform their roles effectively. The provider also actively encouraged and supported access to further training opportunities, contributing to good levels of staff retention.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection effectively. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

People told us the service was clean and our own observations supported this. We observed staff using personal protective equipment when supporting people and it was readily available throughout the service.

Staff had received appropriate training in infection prevention and control to help them maintain good standards. The management team regularly completed hand washing hygiene checks.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

We observed a medication round and found that staff demonstrated good knowledge of the medicines they were administering. They sought people’s consent, clearly explained the purpose of the medication, and took time with each person so they did not feel rushed. Astaff member told us, “We have competency training every year, which is in depth, but we also have peer to peer reviews to help us learn.”

Medication administration records were accurately completed, indicating that people received their medications at the correct times. Routine audits were conducted to maintain effective oversight of medicines management. Whilst fridge temperatures were recorded as required we found the temperature of the treatment rooms were not always recorded, this was addressed immediately by the registered manager.