Clare 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 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 local authority had visited the home and asked the provider for an action plan following concerns raised about the care provided. During our visit we spoke with the registered manager who had introduced several improvements. For example, the home now employed a clinical lead. This meant people’s clinical needs would be monitored and decisions about who to admit to the home would be made jointly within the management team. In addition, staff had additional training and the electronic system had been updated to include more checks.There was a clear wound escalation document for staff to follow.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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 were knowledgeable about safeguarding concerns. Staff were able to explain how to respond to concerns. For example, staff told us if they found a mark or bruise on a person, they would report these findings immediately and make a record of them. Safeguarding processes were effective.

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. Care records showed people were involved in care planning. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were recorded and measures introduced to mitigate them.

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 home was safe and well maintained. Any concerns identified were reported and actions taken.

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. During our visit we observed staff supporting people. People did not have to wait long for staff assistance. Staff were attentive and answered call bells in a timely manner.

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 home was clean and tidy. Staff were able to explain how to protect people from infections. Staff had access to personal protective equipment. We observed staff using aprons and gloves when supporting people.

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. Staff had access to guidance. There was sufficient medicine, including as and when required medicines available for people. The provider had introduced a pain management tool which helped if people were unable to express their pain verbally. This was not in use for everyone as most people we spoke with could express clearly when they may need pain medicine.