Elizabeth House

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 safe and protected from harm, procedures were robust. There were enough staff who were skilled to provide care and support, they knew people well. Risks to people were managed well, assessments were detailed and kept up to date. Staff were recruited safely, supported and there were sufficient numbers to meet people's needs.

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.

Safeguarding records were accurate, and processes were clear. Staff knew how to report their concerns within the home and outside of the home, for example to the local authority safeguarding teams. Policies and procedures were clear regarding safeguarding people and records showed they had been followed.

Interactions were kind, respectful and affectionate between people and staff. Staff were attentive, checking if they could do anything more for people they were supporting.

Staff understood safeguarding procedures. All staff had completed training with regular reminders in staff meetings and updates. Staff knew how to raise concerns both within the home and externally. They were confident the registered manager would take their concerns seriously and follow up on any safeguarding incidents.

People and staff told us Elizabeth House was a good place to be, there was a relaxed atmosphere in the home. One person told us, “I feel safe here yes, we have our little team and the staff, they come and help.” The home had bright décor and accessible, people were coming and going. One person said, “The lounge is comfortable. Conservatory is nice. I'm happy here.”

Staff understood people’s risks and knew them well. Staff told us throughout the inspection about specific risks for people and explained safe ways of working to us.

Risks were identified, assessed and instructions put in place to reduce or remove the risk. People had detailed assessments for all aspects of their care and support. The assessments were updated regularly as planned and when things changed. Risk assessments were accessible to staff and clearly detailed to enable them to be followed easily.

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

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. Staff were calculated by assessing people’s needs and ensuring there was enough staff to safely deliver their care. Training records showed staff were up to date with their mandatory training and attended specific training. Supervision records confirmed staff received support, these were two-way conversations, they were involved. Staff were recruited safely, and recruitment records reflected this. Procedures were in place to ensure the required checks were carried out on staff before they commenced their employment such as references and interviews. This included enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

People told us there was enough staff and they came when they needed them.

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