Freeland House Nursing Home

People told us they were safe living at Freeland House. Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any safeguarding concerns. Risk assessments and management plans were in place and reviewed regularly. Equipment was used appropriately to support people and was checked to ensure it was safe to use.

There were systems and processes for staff to follow and incidents and accidents were analysed. Improvements were made in response to learning from incidents. The provider had a positive culture of safety in which concerns about safety were listened to. We saw evidence that safety events were reported and thoroughly investigated with lessons learnt to continually embed good practices. The provider met their responsibilities in relation to duty of candour.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were enough staff to support people’s needs and the service was fully recruited. Staff had access to supervisions and appraisals which were used to develop and review their practices and focused on professional development. The provider had safe recruitment processes in place.

The provider had an up-to-date infection prevention and control (IPC) policy which staff followed. They ensured infection outbreaks were effectively prevented or managed.

People’s dining experience varied. Whilst some people experienced a positive dining experience, others where not always supported with their nutritional needs as expected. There was a disconnection between the care staff and kitchen staff. Kitchen staff were not always aware of some people's dietary needs such as diabetics despite information having been given to them. The menus provided where not what people were eating on the day of the assessment. Staff did not always know what they were serving people. The provider took immediate action to address the concerns and were continuously looking to improve people’s experiences.

The home was well led. There was a clear and effective management structure which aided the smooth running of the home. Staff were positive about management of the home and told us the provider and the management team were supportive. Staff felt they were listened to and kept informed of improvement plans.

The provider had oversight of the service and effective quality assurance systems in place that they used to monitor the quality and safety of the service. The provider’s systems and processes allowed them to continuously learn and improve across the organisation. Action plans from governance processes were used to improve people’s outcomes both locally and further afield.

Whilst some staff felt confident to speak up, others did not due to personal relationships within the management team. There was no clear process in place for staff to follow when there were personal relationships within the management team which could deter staff from raising concerns. The provider took action and updated their policy to ensure that staff could speak up when they needed to.