Archived: Safehands Care Ltd

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We spoke with 12 people supported in the community and six family members. They told us staff who visited them were polite, friendly and caring. They told us they received patient and safe care and they liked the staff who supported them. Comments received included, “My carers are very nice and professional people. They don’t rush me and I feel safe in their care.” And, “The staff who visit me are very good and I am happy with my care.”

Four people living in the supported living house we visited told us they were happy, safe and liked the staff who supported them.

Prior to our inspection visit a number of people supported in the community had experienced problems with the reliability of their carers and poor communication from the services management. We spoke with 12 people receiving care and six family members. Although not everyone was completely happy, the majority of people we spoke with said there had been improvements. They told us the reliability of their carers had improved and they had been contacted if their carers were running late. One person said, “They had lots of staffing issues and it was really bad but is much better now.”

The service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. People told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them.

The service had safe infection control procedures in place and staff had received infection control training. Staff had been provided with protective clothing such as gloves and aprons as required. This reduced the risk of cross infection.

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

People’s care and support was planned with them. People told us they had been consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered.

Staff supported people to have a nutritious dietary and fluid intake. Assistance was provided in preparation of food and drinks as people needed.

People were supported to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met.

People told us staff were caring towards them. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of high standards of care to give people meaningful lives.

The service had information with regards to support from an external advocate should this be required by people they supported.

People told us staff who visited them treated them with respect and dignity.

People who used the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The service had kept a record of complaints received and these had been responded to appropriately.

The service used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included daily service meetings, quality assurance visits, satisfaction surveys and care reviews.

The registered manager and staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and were committed to providing a good standard of care and support to people in their care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This was the services first inspection since it’s re- registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) on 29 September 2015. This was because the service had recently moved premises.

Safehands Care Ltd provide a domiciliary care service to people who require support in their own homes and the community. People supported include children with a disability, older adults/adults with physical and learning disabilities. People who lived with mental illness and individuals who need assistance due to illness were also supported. The agency operates from premises based at Seasiders Way in Blackpool. At the time of our inspection visit Safehands Care Ltd provided services to 117 people.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found recruitment procedures were safe with appropriate checks undertaken before new staff members commenced their employment. Staff spoken with told us their recruitment had been thorough and professional.

Newly appointed staff received induction training completed at the services office base over a five day period. This was followed by shadowing experienced colleagues until they felt safe to support people unsupervised.

Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs. On the day of our inspection visit we observed five staff members attending the services office base to undertake ‘Record Keeping’ training. One staff member attending the training said, “We receive lot’s of training to ensure we have the skills to support people.”

People supported by the service told us staff who visited them were polite, reliable and professional in their approach to their work. Comments received included, “The staff who visit me are very reliable. I can set my clock by the time of their visits.” And, “The service have been great for me, I have had no problems with them.”

The registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.

Staff knew people they supported and provided a personalised service. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished their care to be delivered. People were involved in making decisions about their care.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care being provided.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. People told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them.

People told us they were usually supported by the same group staff. This ensured people were visited by staff who understood their support needs and how they wanted this to be delivered.