Treetops 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

People were protected from the risks of abuse and staff were trusted to keep them safe. The provider had policies and procedures in place for safeguarding to protect people from the risk of abuse. People had been involved with their risk management. Staff understood about risk and how to keep people safe. Risks were assessed and regularly reviewed. Staff were recruited safely and had the necessary safety checks in place before starting work. Staff received an induction when they first started working at the service and training relevant to their roles. Suitable staffing arrangements were in place. People gave positive feedback about the staff who supported them and the management team.

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 protected from the risks of abuse and staff were trusted to keep them safe. People told us they didn’t have any concerns and the management team were “easy to talk to.” One person told us, “I feel safe here.” Another person told us, “I’d be comfortable talking to the staff if I had any issues.”

The registered manager and staff understood safeguarding policies and procedures. All staff explained how they would record and report any concerns, incidents or accidents. They said incidents were discussed in handovers, which included any changes in support plans to reduce the risk of a reoccurrence. A staff member said, “We discuss any issues [in supervision meeting]) and have scenarios, for example what we would do and who we’d inform if we see a bruise appear.” A nurse said, “If I see any wrong practice I deal with it then and there. I would ask the staff member to refresh their training, and pair them with an experienced colleague to provide support.” Staff spoke about providing support in people’s best interest and how they offered people day to day choices.

Staff used good practices in delivering care. We observed staff seeking people’s consent before providing support. Staff were responsive to people's needs and safe practices, such as moving and handling were used.

The provider had policies and procedures in place for safeguarding and whistleblowing to protect people from the risk of abuse. The service had a safeguarding policy in place which was in line with local guidance. Information around safeguarding was displayed in multiple areas around the home. The provider had an effective system in place to monitor safeguarding concerns, their response and the outcomes of concerns.

People had been involved with their risk management. Some people understood the level of support they needed and felt well supported by staff. One person told us, “They [staff] are understanding and helpful.” Another person explained they felt involved in their care, however, they didn’t want to see their care plan.

Staff understood about risk and how to keep people safe. Staff knew people, their support needs and the risks they may face. They said information about people’s needs was available in the care plans. They were informed about new people’s needs during handovers and were able to read the initial assessments of needs prior to people moving in.

Safe practices in moving and handling were used. We observed staff using moving and handling equipment safely. Staff met people’s daily needs. We saw there was always a staff presence in communal areas and staff were seen to be observant of the people in the vicinity and responsive to their needs. For example, where people were not eating their meal or people tried to mobilise, support was offered.

Risks were assessed and regularly reviewed. Guidance was provided to manage these risks. Information was sometimes brief, for example strategies to use when people became agitated. ABC charts were used to monitor and review people’s behaviour if needed. People’s nutritional needs were recorded. Staff knew who required thickened drinks or modified meals to reduce the risk of choking.

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 gave positive feedback about the staff who supported them and the management team. One person told us, “The staff are well-trained, friendly and very helpful.” Another person told us, “They [staff] are pleasant and well-trained.”

Staff received an induction when they first started working at the service and training relevant to their roles. Staff said they had the training and support for their roles, including clinical training for nurses. Training courses were completed when new staff started work and they also completed shadow shifts. Staff said they had regular supervision and staff meetings where they were able to raise any issues they had. They felt these would be listened to and addressed. Suitable staffing arrangements were in place. All staff said there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. They reported there was a stable staff team and agency staff were rarely used. Staff were allocated to roles each shift, for example supporting people with personal care or being located in the communal areas. A member of staff said, “They [managers] try to change it round each day, so all staff work in different areas. We make sure there’s staff in both the lounge and dining room.”

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. We observed staff being responsive when people needed support. There was always a member of staff in each communal area. The lunchtime was well organised, and staff were observant in recognising when people were not eating their meals and offered encouragement or support as needed.

Staff were recruited safely and had the necessary safety checks in place before starting work. Pre-employment checks were completed prior to people commencing employment. We found some staff member’s application forms included their home as part of their employment history. The provider stated this was due to the files being updated.

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.