Libertatem Healthcare Group Ltd Head Office

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

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. An incident and accident log was maintained, and the provider consistently reviewed entries to identify learning opportunities.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. A system was in place to collaborate with local authority and case workers teams to support people to return to their own homes following a hospital stay.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff members we spoke with clearly understood the correct procedures to follow if they suspected someone was at risk of harm or abuse. They had received safeguarding training, and the topic was regularly discussed during team meetings. All potential safeguarding issues had been reported to the local authority safeguarding team.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Risk assessments were developed in partnership with the people receiving care. People were encouraged to express their views and preferences, and these were clearly reflected in the documentation. This approach helped ensure that risk management strategies were both effective and respectful of personal autonomy. For example 1 person was fully involved in their driving risk assessment. The provider liaised with healthcare professionals and the person to assess their ability to continue driving safely.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Before staff commenced support in people’s homes a full environmental risk assessment was conducted, with the person’s consent.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Everyone we spoke with described staff as highly skilled and motivated. Training was completed prior to staff beginning to work with people, and tailored face-to-face sessions were held monthly to ensure staff felt well supported in delivering person-centred care and upholding the organisation’s values. One staff member shared, “The company ensures we receive ongoing training and refreshers to maintain high standards of care.” Another commented on feeling exceptionally well trained due to the monthly workshops and training provided by the organisation. Senior staff spent time with people and their families before care and support began to ensure staff were appropriately matched based on skills and shared interests, helping to foster meaningful connections.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. All staff were supplied with personal protective equipment (PPE). People told us staff wore PPE when providing personal care and then disposed of it safely after use.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. There was a thorough and well-structured approach to supporting people with their medicines. Medication Administration Records (MARs) were reviewed to identify and address any errors, and any changes to a person’s medicine regime was promptly reflected in their care plan. Clear procedures were in place for the administration of PRN medicines (those prescribed to be taken as needed). Medicines requiring specialist techniques, such as through a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) tube which is a method used to deliver nutrition, fluids, or medication directly into the stomach. This was clearly recorded on people's MAR.