Wraxall Road Nursing Home

The home was purpose built to accommodate people with physical disabilities. The service was split into two areas, Allen House and School House. There were separate entrances to each property with a connecting corridor in the centre where the laundry and main office was situated. Each house had access to a kitchen, bathrooms and a lounge.

We found the following examples of good practice. • Since the onset of the pandemic, there had been no confirmed or suspected cases of people using the service having contracted COVID-19, at the time of this review. Staff were being tested weekly and people they supported every 28 days in line with the government guidance. Individual assessments and best interest decisions had been made about Covid testing for people who use the service.

• Staff greeted visitors when they arrived at the home and took their temperature, checked they were in good health and ensured they were wearing the correct Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Arrangements for visiting were displayed clearly so health and social care professionals, friends and family knew what was expected of them to keep people safe. Visitors had to leave their contact details as part of a track and trace system.

• Visitors entered the home via a side door which meant they were not moving between the two houses. There was a separate zoned area for putting on and removing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), and suitable arrangements for their disposal. There was sufficient hand sanitizer, gloves and aprons. Staff understood zoning and cohorting principles and would be able to put these into practice in the event of an outbreak. Some of these had already been implemented such as the people living in Allen House and School House were completely separate and did not mix with each other.

• The service used creative ways to ensure activities were still offered to people living in the service. This included when restrictions were lifted accessing the community based on individual risk assessments. Activities continued in the home daily, one person was visited by their day care staff on a weekly basis. Some people had been on holiday with robust risk assessments in place to ensure their safety and the staff that were supporting them. Staff helped people to stay in touch with family and friends through phone and video calls and visits to the home. Window visits had been arranged where a person was isolating for 14 days after a hospital admission.

• The provider and registered manager had ensured that staff had up to date information to keep people and staff safe. At the height of the pandemic there was daily communication. The provider had also ensured

staff had access to other agencies that could support with mental wellbeing including counselling support. The provider clearly valued staff who had been well supported and received a bonus for their continued good work.

• All staff had received additional infection prevention and control training, and training in RESTORE2. This training provides a framework for staff to recognise the early signs of a person's health deteriorating meaning health intervention could be sought quicker.

• There were clear policies, procedures, quality assurance checks and contingency plans in place in respect of managing the pandemic and keeping people and staff safe.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found