Rivermead

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/changed to Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

People received safe care and support and told us they felt safe living at Rivermead. Risks to people's safety were assessed and well managed, and people’s care plans detailed current risks and individual needs. There were sufficient numbers of staff who were safely recruited to meet people's needs. Risks to the environment were swiftly addressed and the service was well maintained and adapted to meet the needs of people living with dementia. Staff were trained in infection control and had the appropriate personal protective equipment to perform their roles safely. The service was clean and tidy, and regular cleaning took place to ensure the prevention of the spread of infection.

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.

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 felt safe when staff provided them with care and support. One person said, "The carers make me feel safe, they make the place safe for me and they are there to watch how I am walking or if I had all my medicines.”

Discussions with staff demonstrated they were skilled at recognising when people were at risk of harm or felt unsafe, and they felt comfortable to report unsafe practice. One staff member said, "I would definitely report anything I was concerned about. I have had to do it before, and it was dealt with properly.” All staff we spoke with confirmed they had completed training and understood the providers whistleblowing and safeguarding policies and procedures.

Staff interactions with people were respectful and inclusive. For example, we saw that 1 person was feeling anxious and liked a staff member to stay with them for a while to talk with them. We saw the staff member sitting and holding hands with the person until they felt happy for the staff member to leave them.

Records confirmed the service had policies and procedures which covered how to safeguard vulnerable people from abuse and how to ‘whistle blow’ if necessary. We saw safeguarding training was considered essential by the registered provider and all staff completed this and regular refresher courses. The training records and discussions with staff confirmed this. The manager maintained a safeguarding log, to ensure they had effective managerial oversight of any safeguarding concerns. Records showed the provider reported safeguarding incidents as required to the relevant agencies.

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. Risks to people had been assessed and planned for. Staff knew people very well and supported people with their individual needs.

Staff told us they felt they could confidently support people safely, and that the risk assessments accurately reflected people's needs, and the way they should be supported.

We observed staff safely supporting people to transfer from a chair to a wheelchair using a hoist. The person was transferred safely and appeared comfortable and relaxed during the process.

People had detailed risk assessments in place which guided staff on how to keep people safe. For example, if people were at risk of falls, a detailed risk management plan was put in place to reduce the likelihood of any further falls. Risk assessments were reviewed and updated swiftly if there were any changes or incidents. For example, where one person had a fall their risk assessments and care plans were updated.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. A relative told us, “This is [family members] home. They love their room and are very proud. They tidy their space every day, makes their bed and keeps themselves busy.”

Staff told us they carried out safety checks around the service and if anything required attention this was always carried out swiftly. One staff member said, “We try to make the home look like home. Residents can bring in their own belongings and furniture if they like.”

The environment had been adapted to help to meet people's needs, in particular people living with dementia to promote their independence. We observed clear dementia friendly pictorial signage to communal areas and bathroom facilities. There were points of interest around the service and "landmarks" to help support people to navigate their way around, both inside and outside.

The environment had a variety of sensory objects available for people to engage with and points of interest that contained objects people could easily recognise and relate to. For example, accessories such as hats and scarves, memorabilia and different locks and catches. This meant that people living with dementia were able to live in an environment that allowed them to feel safe and secure while it provided comfort, routine and social opportunities. This allowed them to experience more personal control and meant they could take part meaningful activities that they enjoyed.

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. One person said, "I think there are enough staff, we are well covered. There is always somebody to call if you need them. If I need someone I call, and they come.” Another person told us, “There are plenty of staff, they sit on my bed and talk to me.”

Staff told us that staffing levels were good and there were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs. One staff member said, “Staffing isn’t an issue. We have enough staff. It would always be nice to have another member of staff, but we manage okay and still have time to spend with people.”

Our observations confirmed there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. We saw the deployment of staff throughout the day was organised and people who required support with their personal care needs received this in a timely and sensitive way. We found staff had time to spend with people on an individual basis.

The provider followed robust recruitment procedures to ensure people were protected from staff that may not be fit to support them. Disclosure and barring service (DBS) security checks and references were obtained before new staff started the probationary period. These checks help employers to make safer recruitment decisions and prevent unsuitable staff being employed.

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. People and relatives told us the home was always clean and hygienic, and that staff always washed their hands and wore PPE when carrying out personal care. One relative told us, “I think the home always smells good, the floors are clean and it’s always spotless.”

Staff confirmed they had completed Infection Control training and had access to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). One staff member said, “The manager provides us all with the necessary PPE to carry out personal care. I have access to infection control guidance, and I am provided with information on appropriate staff behaviour with regards to infection control. This includes washing hands, appropriate use of PPE and cleaning.”

We observed the service to be clean and hygienic and we saw staff used personal, protective clothing and equipment safely.

Measures were in place to control and prevent the spread of infection. Staff completed training in relation to the control of infection and they had sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE). The provider had an infection control policy in place that was up to date and accessible to staff. Regular audits were completed to ensure compliance with Infection control protocols. Feedback from these audits ensured immediate corrective actions and ongoing improvements to infection control practices. The provider also observed infection control practices through regular spot checks, and they worked closely with local health services to stay informed about current infection risks and control measures.

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