Byron Lodge Care Home Ltd

People were not always protected from avoidable harm because risk assessments were not always clear, comprehensive and up to date. This was an area for improvement. Staff and leaders were able to identify situations that amounted to safeguarding and staff were confident to use the whistleblowing process if needed. Staff knew people well and were able to identify changes to health and identify care and support needs. Lessons were learned when things went wrong. Medicines were administered and recorded safely. Medicines policies had not always been followed by staff in relation to administering PRN (as and when required medicines). Staff were recruited safely and were supported through training, there was a plan in place to make sure they had ongoing support in the form of supervision and appraisal meetings. There were enough staff to support people safely. Ongoing training made sure that staff had the skills needed to support people. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and actioned by the management team, safety checks were undertaken by staff. The provider worked with people and partners including local authority care managers and health professionals to establish and maintain safe systems of care. The provider had systems and processes in place to detect and control potential risks in the care environment and processes in place to assess and manage the risk of infection. We were assured that the provider was working to improve safety through the layout and hygiene practices of the premises.

People were unable to recall being involved in their assessments and care planning processes. Before people moved into the service their needs were assessed. The provider had systems and processes in place to meet people’s nutrition and hydration needs. People told us the service worked with GP’s and health professionals to meet their health needs. The provider had a clear process in place to escalate health concerns within a timely manner. Staff had a good understanding of meeting people’s changing needs. Staff told us they had training and support to meet people’s care and health needs. Care plans were in place which detailed people’s care and support needs as well as their clinical needs in relation to health conditions. People's choice and consent was valued, and the staff continually consulted people about their wellbeing and wishes.

People were treated with respect and kindness. People’s cultural and religious needs were respected. The provider had systems and processes in place to promote and support staff wellbeing. Staff told us they received appropriate support.

The provider had systems and processes in place to understand the diverse health and care needs of people living at the service. The service was being supported by a frailty nurse from the GP surgery and the GP, all of whom conducted regular visits as well as support by telephone. People had care plans in place, they had not always been involved in developing these. Some care plans were not as detailed as they could be to help staff understand people’s care and support needs. We observed communicating effectively with people. There were way marking signs and information around the service to help people orientate. Menus and activities were on display, these were available in different formats on request. People attended meetings with the management team to feedback about the service.

There was an inclusive and positive culture of continuous learning and improvement. This was based on meeting the needs of people who use services. Leaders proactively supported staff and collaborated with partners to improve the service and improve the quality of care being delivered to ensure it was safe and person-centred.