Riverview Care 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.

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.

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. Safeguarding procedures were in place to ensure people were protected from avoidable harm. People told us they felt safe living at the service, comments included, “I know I am safe, I always shut the door behind me”, “The staff help with things so I don’t get hurt” and, “Yes. Safe here.” Posters displayed throughout the building informed people, staff and visitors how to report concerns. Safeguarding records showed referrals had been made as necessary and this included notifying CQC of certain events as required by law. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met. All legal applications had been made in accordance with DoLS, this meant people’s rights were fully respected.

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. Friends and relatives of people told us they felt, “Individual and joint activities were explored with great imagination and knowledge of appropriate and safe opportunities.” Staff told us about daily tasks completed to keep people safe. These included visual checks of the environment and reporting any concerns identified so these could be addressed. Risk assessments and care plans highlighted people’s strengths and focused on maintaining people’s independence by providing guidance for staff to encourage positive risk taking.

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

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. Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and management team. Supervisions were carried out and staff told us they could contact the registered manager any time. The registered manager was passionate about ensuring training could be accessed by all staff and explained reasonable adjustments made for staff who had dyslexia (a condition that makes it difficult for people to read, write and spell) and how each training subject was adapted for each staff member’s individual learning style. Staff were recruited safely. There were procedures in place to ensure the required checks were carried out on staff before they commenced 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. Staff learning and development was in place to ensure staff were properly inducted into the service and their knowledge developed. The registered manager and the provider had oversight of training within the service.

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.