Master Quality Health Care Services

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 had good oversight of accidents, incidents and complaints and recorded them appropriately.

Staff told us the leadership team had a supportive learning and development culture, and they were encouraged to speak up to share concerns and ideas for improvements. One staff member told us: "The manager is helpful and always listens to staff, we meet and discuss to share things."

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.

Detailed assessments were completed before commencement of care packages to make sure important information about people’s needs was collected. Care plans were reviewed regularly and when people’s needs changed. This was recorded and leaders made sure all information was shared with staff so that care was delivered safely and in line with best practice.

Managers worked closely with health and social care professionals to make sure safe systems of care were maintained. For example, action was taken following an error which included contacting the person’s social worker. This was recorded with actions in place to support a safe system of care for that person.

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.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people were safeguarded from the risk of abuse. Staff received safeguarding training and understood what they needed to do if they thought someone was at risk in line with the provider’s policy.

People told us they felt safe when receiving care. One relative told us "Yes because they do their job properly, they talk to [Name]"

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.

Care records were detailed and accurate. They were completed in collaboration with people. Staff told us they read risk assessments and understood the risks to people’s health and how to mitigate them. Risks linked to moving and handling were identified and actions put in place to manage the risk. This enabled staff to support people 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.

Staff were trained to use equipment safely and training records were up to date. People told us they knew who to contact to raise a concern. People’s feedback included: "They keep a careful eye on me and make sure I don't do anything silly" and "They are always watchful of what I am doing to make sure I am safe."

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.

Safe recruitment processes were in place. Staff received training, supervision and appraisals. Leaders carried out monthly competency checks to support staff in their role.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff told us there was enough staff and they worked together well as a team. Feedback included, “Yes, we have enough staff, they rotate so we won’t be tired, so we have more energy for work," “We are one team; they are all supportive I must say” and “I think it’s good communication and teamwork.”

People told us they were happy with the staff that supported them, one person told us, “Very friendly. Always on time, always chatty."

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.

The provider had an infection prevention and control (IPC) policy in place and staff were trained. IPC was an agenda item at staff meetings. Leaders were committed to ensuring staff maintained high standards regarding IPC. Personal protective equipment was readily available for staff and people confirmed staff always wore it.

Staff feedback included, “[We] always dress nicely with clean uniforms, and we have new ones from the office to take."

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.

Staff received training in managing medicines and their competency in this area was checked. Staff understood the importance of medicines being given at the times they were prescribed.

Detailed risk assessments relating to medicines were in place when required, which details of relevant professionals to get in touch with if necessary. Allergies were documented on all medical records. People who had creams prescribed by their GP had body maps in place to show staff where to apply them. Appropriate medicines audits were in place.

People’s care plans showed how they liked to take their medicines.