Virtuous Business Solutions Limited

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

The provider carried out analysis and review of incidents, accidents and near misses to identify themes and patterns.Accidents and incidents were recorded, with clear evidence of actions taken to reduce the risk of recurrence.

Care records showed risk assessments and care plans were reviewed and amended when required to help ensure people received safe care and support.

Staff told us, they had received relevant training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills necessary to provide safe and effective care and received feedback around incidents and learning at staff meetings.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored.

People’s care and support was planned and organised with them, professionals and staff to ensure safe continuity of care through a collaborative, joined-up approach.

The views of people, partners and staff were listened to and taken into account. People we spoke with knew who to contact, and care plans reflected people’s needs to support smooth pathways and transitions between services.

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.

People and their relatives told us, they felt safe, we heard, “I definitely feel safe yes” and “I do feel safe with the staff, I get the same staff who come to me.”

The provider had effective systems, processes and practices to make sure people were protected from abuse and neglect. People were supported to understand what being safe meant, and how to raise concerns when they didn’t feel safe. The provider actioned people’s concerns and sought feedback from people who raised concerns, people told us they had noted improvement in their care following raising their concern, which was managed appropriately and timely.

Staff received safeguarding training, were confident in raising concerns, and demonstrated a good knowledge of signs of abuse. Saff told us, “We talk about safeguarding's, and have recently reviewed the safeguarding policy, we have had training and supervisions about safeguarding, and we talk about safety concerns in meetings. I would raise concerns with the local authority if I felt I was unable to raise it with the service.”

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 detailed, personalised and regularly monitored, analysed and updated to ensure these remained effective and relevant. They included how staff should use equipment and people’s abilities.

Staff told us, they had access to risk assessments and used them to help deliver safe and appropriate care. Some staff completed regular key working update reports as part of their responsibilities, this helped to monitor and inform the provider where people’s needs may need to be reviewed. Staff told us, “Yes care planning contains the relevant information, but if I see something is missed, I will get back to the office to let them know I think something has been missed, or there has been a change, and they [management] will tell you it has been updated.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Environmental risk assessments and Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPS) were in place for some people. PEEPS which were in place considered multiple emergency scenarios and provided step-by-step guidance for staff, including alternative methods of transfer, the location of evacuation equipment and different escape routes based on the location of the fire and the individual.

The provider ensured equipment used to support people, including lifting aids, were regularly serviced and maintained in accordance with manufacturer requirements. This helped to ensure equipment remained safe and fit for purpose, reducing the risk of harm to people and staff.

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.

People we spoke with were highly complementary about the staff and the quality of care they received, we heard, “Yes the staff are very well trained” and “Yes the staff all know what they are doing.”

Recruitment records demonstrated appropriate pre-employment checks were completed, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and obtaining references. Competency assessments had been completed to ensure staff were safe to carry out their roles and were completed yearly to ensure staff continued to be competent.

Staff received regular training, supervisions and spot checks. Supervision provided staff with opportunities to discuss their performance, training needs, and concerns, helping to ensure they were appropriately supported in their role.

Staff told us, “I have received feedback and supervisions have taken place, I feel supported and I’m free to air my views and speak my mind and my opinions” and “Training, we cover most of the training needed, this could be face to face online, there's enough training, we do refresher ones online too.”

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.

People’s care records detailed the use of personal protective equipment within their daily records. People told us, staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) during their visits, we heard, “Staff always wear gloves.”

Staff had completed infection prevention and control training and had access to appropriate (PPE).

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People we spoke with told us, “They [staff] support me with my creams.” People were encouraged and supported to self-administer their medicines where appropriate, helping to promote independence.

Staff had received competency assessment to ensure the safe practice of medicines.

Systems were in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and in line with their needs. Medicines were regularly reviewed by the provider, to ensure people received their medicines safely and effectively, stock checks were completed and audits carried out regularly.

The provider had worked with staff to strengthen terminology used in people’s care planning around medicines. Medicines guidance clearly defined the difference between administering, prompting and assisting with medicines, including staff responsibilities and included examples of each.