Eastfield 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

Evidence showed people were safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any safeguarding concerns. Risk assessments and management plans were in place and reviewed regularly. Risks related to bruising were assessed and managed safely. Equipment was used appropriately to support people and was checked to ensure it was safe to use. There were systems and processes for staff to follow and incidents and accidents were analysed. Improvements were made in response to learning from incidents. There were enough staff to support people’s needs.

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.

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

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.

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

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People and relatives told us they felt the environment was safe. They felt supported to manage risks.

The registered manager provided evidence of their skills and knowledge to carry out the role of a competent person for the purposes of carrying out a Legionella risk assessment, but there was no evidence of any formal training. The registered manager provided feedback on their progress in meeting the fire department's requirements. The compartmentation survey and associated works required for people's safety were in progress. The other required fire actions had been completed. Staff told us they had annual face to face fire and moving and handling training. They understood how to evacuate people. Staff told us they had regular fire drills. Senior staff confirmed the building was not purpose built for the needs of people living with dementia and lacked the use of colour to support people to orientate themselves.

The building appeared secure and there were extensive grounds for people's enjoyment. We saw the fire compartmentation work was underway. People had any equipment they needed which had been checked for safety. Staff were observed to transfer people safely. There was insufficient directional signage and colour contrasts to enable people to orientate themselves around the service. We found a couple of areas where maintenance was required, this was addressed swiftly. A bathroom was cluttered and used for storage.

People had environmental risk assessments identifying any risks to them and how these were to be managed. Personal evacuation plans were clear and detailed. Records were kept of welfare checks on people in their rooms.

People and several relatives told us there were enough staff who were kind and caring and understood their role. Two people mentioned the number of male staff rostered, particularly at night which they said took time to get used to. This was raised with the senior staff and registered manager who said they would look at how staffing was scheduled.

Senior staff were not familiar with the requirements of the regulations for staff to have proof of satisfactory conduct in all their previous health and social care roles. Staff felt well supported in their role with training to enable them to meet people's needs and they had senior staff support. Training records showed that staff had received all necessary training.

We saw there were plenty of staff to support people and where needed to provide one to one support.

Not all required information for staff was available at the site visit, however most was provided afterwards. A staff member who had worked for the provider for 11 years still lacked a reference for one of their previous jobs in social care. The provider has now risk assessed this member of staff and advised us, they would do the same for any other staff they identified that were missing any references for previous roles in health and social care. The provider used an external recruitment policy which correctly required evidence of satisfactory conduct in all previous roles. Staffing rosters showed a minimum of one female staff was rostered each night. However, on two nights the female carer had been sick. This meant there was not a choice of a female carer if people needed this on those nights.

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.

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