• Care Home
  • Care home

Primroses Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

95 Primrose Avenue, Romford, Essex, RM6 4PS (020) 3172 2860

Provided and run by:
Primroses Care Limited

Report from 18 April 2024 assessment

On this page

Safe

Good

Updated 20 August 2024

People commented positively about the care and support they received from staff. There were systems to reduce the risk of abuse and to assess and monitor potential risks to people who used the service. There were enough staff to meet people’s care and support needs. The provider had a system in place to learn from lessons following incidents or accidents to improve quality of care to people. Medicines were managed safely. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection.

This service scored 69 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Learning culture

Score: 2

The provider had a system in place to record and monitor accidents and incidents. Records of accidents and incidents were reviewed by the registered manager and actions taken to reduce the likelihood of them happening again. There was evidence that learning from incidents and investigations took place.

Safe systems, pathways and transitions

Score: 2

We looked at records which confirmed that the registered manager had an effective working relationship with a number of health care professionals to ensure that people received co-ordinated care and support. System was in place to ensure effective monitoring of care continued as people move between services. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to a number of health care services.

Safeguarding

Score: 3

Feedback from people and their relatives was positive. People felt safe living at the service. People who used the service had complex communication support needs, however, a person told us how they felt they had improved since living at the service and staff were always approachable to them.

The registered manager told us they followed the safeguarding policy and reported any allegation to the safeguarding team. Staff mentioned that safeguarding was discussed during team meetings. They had received training in this area and were aware of the steps to take to report any allegations of abuse. Staff were very positive about the training they received to help safeguard people from abuse.

We saw positive interaction from staff and people during our visit. Staff clearly understood their roles and responsibilities as well as people’s support needs. They supported people in a kind and caring way.

Systems were in place to safeguard people who used the service. The provider had policies and procedures in place to inform staff how to deal with any allegations of abuse. There was a whistleblowing policy in place for staff to report any concerns they had to external organisations such as the police or the CQC.

Involving people to manage risks

Score: 3

Potential risks about people’s safety within their home were assessed to ensure they were supported to remain as safe as possible. A person said that they used the community independently, however, they knew they could contact the staff if they had any concerns. They also told us that staff were there to listen to them if they had any worries and anxieties about anything. They said, “The staff listen and help me solve the issue. It’s a nice home.”

Staff were aware of the actions they needed to take to ensure people received safe care and support. They knew what people risks were and how to manage them.

We saw people received care in a safe manner. Staff knew what people’s care needs and risk assessments were and provided them with care and support accordingly.

The service had a process in place to manage risk to people. Individual's records contained risk assessments, including instructions to staff on action to reduce risks to people using the service and themselves. Risk assessments were reviewed when people’s needs changed. This meant that people were protected against risk of harm.

Safe environments

Score: 3

A person told us that they felt supported to be able to live the life they choose to in a safe way. Relatives were also very positive about how the service supported people to keep safe and felt the environment was kept clean and tidy.

The provider and staff were aware of their responsibilities to ensure people received care and support in a safe environment. A member of staff told us, “I make sure all doors and locks are working properly and ensure fire exits are working.”

We saw staff carried out daily, weekly, and monthly checks, for example, the kitchen checks were being done regularly. The provider had a recent environment health visit from the local authority.

We looked at records which confirmed that checks on the premises and equipment were carried out to ensure health and safety of people, staff and visitors to the service. We saw checks had been carried out on the electrical hard wiring, fire extinguishers and gas boiler.

Safe and effective staffing

Score: 3

People and their relatives were positive about the staff team and felt they had the skills and knowledge to support people safely. A person told us there were sufficient staff on duty during the day and night to help meet their needs.

The provider and staff told us there were enough staff working for the service to ensure people's needs were met. A member of staff mentioned that there were 3 staff during the day and 2 staff at night.

During our visit we found there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to provide personalised care and support. We saw that there was positive interaction from staff and people.

The provider had safe recruitment processes in place to ensure suitable and experienced staff were employed to work with people. New staff received induction training when they began to work for the service which was refreshed annually. The registered manager confirmed they assessed the staffing levels according to people’s needs. For example, if a person needed to go out to a hospital appointment, then there would be an extra member of staff on duty. This meant that the staffing levels in place were monitored on an ongoing basis to ensure they were sufficient to meet people’s changing needs. People had the same group of care staff providing care and support to them, and this helped with consistency. The provider did not use any agency staff.

Infection prevention and control

Score: 3

A person told us that they were supported to help keep their room clean by staff. A relative also mentioned they felt the service was clean and tidy and that during the pandemic staff kept people safe.

The provider and staff were aware of the ways to prevent the spread of infection such as hand hygiene, cleaning and safe management of the environment.

We saw the service had hand hygiene facilities and staff had access to personal protective equipment and cleaning equipment.

The provider had infection prevention and control policies and procedures in place, in line with relevant national guidance. Staff were provided with personal protective equipment such as gloves and aprons. This helped to prevent any spread of bacteria or viruses. Staff had received training in infection control and were aware of their responsibilities in this area. Checks were carried out daily, weekly and monthly to prevent people and health staff from being harmed by avoidable infections.

Medicines optimisation

Score: 3

People told us that staff supported them to take their medicines and reminded them the times their medicines were due. They were happy with the ways staff assisted them with their medicines.

The registered manager told us that they had a pharmacy that was very supportive, and they worked very closely with them as well as the GP service.

The service had suitable arrangements to protect people using the service against risks associated with the unsafe management of medicines. People were supported with their prescribed medicines by staff whose competency to administer people’s medicines had been assessed. This helped to ensure they maintained a good understanding of safe medicines administration. During our visit we saw evidence that medicine administration records were completed correctly and there were no gaps or errors identified. Any medicines prescribed to be given as necessary were monitored and guidance explained when these medicines should be given.