Ivy Court

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 told us they felt safe living at Ivy Court. The provider was open and honest when things went wrong and could demonstrate lessons they had leant to improve the service. Risks associated with people’s care had been identified and staff were knowledgeable about peoples needs and ensuring they received safe care. However, care plans and risk assessments required improving to reflect people’s current needs.

This service scored 56 (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.

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

People and were satisfied with the care they received. One person said, “When I was struggling, and I really needed staff and they never left me they were absolutely brilliant and I’m not easy to please.” Another person said, “They [staff] have got the right balance here, and there are no restrictions.”

We observed staff interacting with people and found staff did not always respond to people in a positive way. Staff were kind and caring but required further training to help them support people living with dementia in a person centred way. We observed lunch being served and found staff offered choices to people.

Staff told us they were knowledgeable about risks associated with people’s care. Staff felt they worked well together as a team and improvements were being made. Staff acknowledged there were more improvements to be made but had confidence the registered manager would make the necessary changes. One staff member said, “Everything the [registered manager] has done is a positive.”

Risks associated with people’s care had been identified and actions had been taken to minimise risks. However, care plans and risk assessments did not always reflect people’s current needs or highlight risks associated with their care. The registered manager reviewed and updated documents we highlighted as a concern and had a system in place to review all documents.

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

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

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

People told us they received their medicines as prescribed. One person said, “I have never had a problem.” Another person said, “I like to take my tablets with a drink, and they [staff] make sure I have one.” We observed staff administering medicines to people and found they did so in a safe way.

Staff told us they received the appropriate training and support to ensure medicines were administered as prescribed. The registered manager informed us staff had competency checks to ensure training had been effective. Staff confirmed their competencies were checked and retraining given if there were any errors made.

The registered manager had recently implemented new systems to strengthen practices around medicine management. People who required medicines on an ‘as and when ‘required basis, had detailed protocols in place informing the reader how and when people required their medicines. Medicines were stored appropriately.