Eve Belle

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

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question: Safeguarding, Involving people to manage risk, Safe and effective staffing, and Medicines optimisation. Concerns about safety and safeguarding were recorded, listened to, investigated, and reported to the relevant authorities where required. There was an openness, transparency, and willingness to learn from events and improve the service. Staff had been recruited safely and were suitably trained, and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Care plans contained information relating to risk and individual people’s needs. People received their medicines by staff who were trained to do so.

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.

People were positive about the care they received and told us they felt safe and were involved in their care arrangements. One person told us, “It’s a lovely place to be and they take care of me well.” A family member said, “When [relative] calls for help, there is always someone who comes and having the call bell is reassuring.”

Staff had received training in how to safeguard people, knew how to raise any concerns with the management and how to report concerns externally if required. A member of staff told us, “The manager communicated with us about safeguarding people, and we had lots of talks about different aspects of it recently. Handover is more thorough so we can ensure all the necessary checks are done to make sure people are well looked after.”

We observed people to be comfortable in the presence of staff members. It was evident staff knew people well. There was a calm, relaxed, friendly, and homely atmosphere at Eve Belle, where people were free to move around the building, with support available and spend time doing as they wished.

Safeguarding policies and procedures were available to staff. The provider had systems in place to ensure all safety concerns would be investigated and action taken to ensure people’s safety. A review of the recording and reporting of incidents and accidents and safeguarding concerns had taken place to ensure greater safety of people using the service. Records showed the service had made safeguarding alerts to the local authority and statutory notifications to CQC

Care plans and risks assessments included information on how to support people safely including their mobility, equipment, medicines, consent, skin care and food and drink. One person told us, “I always have my say about things that are about me. The staff always ask my permission to help me with anything I need.”

Staff knew people's needs and the risks associated with their care and support. All information was recorded and accessible to staff including any reviews and changes to their care arrangements. Care plans identified areas where risks could be minimised. We noted that equipment such as walking aids, airflow mattresses to reduce pressure sores and sensor mats to assist with reducing risk of falls were used appropriately. A member of staff told us, “We have good working relationships with professionals such as the pharmacist, GP and the falls prevention team. This helps to bring in specialist advice when people need it and we can follow the actions recommended.”

People were encouraged to remain independent, and we observed people walking around the service, with assistance from staff where required. Staff encouraged people to use their walking equipment to reduce the risk of falls and had the awareness to know what equipment they used.

During the assessment, we reviewed people’s care plans and risk assessments which provided information about potential risks to people. Systems and processes were in place to cascade information regarding changes to people’s care, and these were reviewed regularly by the senior staff. Appropriate professionals had been consulted to provide specialist advice and support for example, the continence nurse, Parkinson’s Disease nurse, the speech and language team, falls prevention team and the dietician. The local GP surgery was supportive and worked closely with the service including the Care Home Team.

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

People told us there were enough staff to provide the care and support they required. A person said, “Staff are very helpful and always around.” A family member said, “I think there are enough staff, and [relative] feels safe and supported, that is the main thing.”

Staff were positive about working at the service. They told us there were enough staff with different skills and experience to support people safely. A staff member told us, “The company is very good to work for, like a second family to me. Everyone is very supportive, and management are very approachable. I am very happy to come to work every day.” Another said, “We get lots of training and if we need help, a senior staff will always sit with us to show us, which really helps. You are never rushed or made to feel silly.”

On the day of our assessment, we found there was enough staff present to support people safely. Staff had the appropriate skills and experience to support people well. Staff were not rushed and gave people the time they needed. During lunch and at activity times, we observed staff working together to provide full support to people to ensure they had their meals on time and could join in the activities on offer. Staff were capable and professional and adapted their approach to individual people’s needs. We observed good interaction and communication between people and all staff who worked at the service.

Systems were in place to ensure there were suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. The rotas we saw were planned and organised and the correct number of staff were on duty as per the rota on the day of the assessment. There was an induction programme for new staff including face to face training, shadowing more experienced staff and competency checks. Staff were supported to complete nationally recognized training such as the care certificate or diplomas in social care. Staff had support, supervision and staff meetings to share learning and review performance. Appropriate checks were in place before staff started work including taking up references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. DBS provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. There were some gaps in people’s employment history which were unaccounted for. We made the registered manager aware of this and action was taken to remedy this quickly.

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.

People received their medicines as prescribed. They were supported to take their medicines in an unhurried way. Consent was gained and people were asked how they wanted to take their medicine for example one tablet at a time or all together. People were aware of the medicines they were taking. We saw the staff member telling the person what their medicine was as they gave it to them. People were asked if they required any pain relief for those on ‘as required’ medicines. For those who did, the staff member went back to the person after a period of time to see if the pain relief was effective.

The senior staff were responsible for administering people’s medicines and we observed people receiving their medicines when they needed them. The staff member followed good administration practice that was safe during our observation of the medicine’s being given at breakfast time. Time specific medicines were given on time, and we saw the staff had an alarm to remind them to ensure these medicines were given. The medicine, time and reason for given was entered on the medicine administration record.

The provider's medicine policies and procedures were in place and regular audits were carried out. However, an improvement was needed in the process for giving controlled medicines, as whilst two staff checked the medicine before giving it, both did not witness the person taking it. We spoke with the seniors and registered manager about this, and action was taken quickly to ensure the correct process was in place.