LPTC Solutions Hull

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 72 (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.

Safety incidents were accurately recorded, thoroughly investigated and appropriate action taken. These were reviewed to consider themes and trends and used to inform future training plans. Learning was shared with staff.

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.

Information was shared with people, staff and partners to ensure people’s needs were well-known and understood by all. Documents showed how people had been supported to engage in the planning process.

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 did not always share concerns quickly and appropriately.

Safeguarding procedures were in place and the service had made appropriate submissions to the Local Authority. However, we found the service had not always submitted timely statutory notifications to the Care Quality Commission. We spoke with the registered manager about this and were assured this was an oversight and that these would be made appropriately in the future.

People were supported appropriately under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The service worked with advocates to support people to express their wishes and ensure these were met. The service proactively ensured people were not restricted in their daily lives and the support they received reflected this.

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.

Risks relating to all aspects of people’s care were individually assessed and mitigated against. Clear directions were provided to ensure people and staff were safe. The service supported positive risk taking and enabled people to be as independent as possible. Staff supported people to understand risks and how to remain safe.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Regular checks were undertaken to ensure people’s living environments and equipment were safe. The service had recently employed a Health and Safety lead to ensure procedures and checks were undertaken appropriately. We saw how one person was supported to regulate their temperature by encouraging them to wear appropriate clothing.

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.

One person confirmed, “I have the same [staff]. They tell me who is coming on shift.”

Robust recruitment arrangements were in place. Staff completed mandatory training before they received a thorough induction, with shadowing over two-weeks, which was extended until staff felt confident. Staff received regular training to refresh their knowledge each year as well as additional specialised training where needed and checks on their competency.

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 were protected from the risk of infection. Staff received appropriate training and there were good supplies of PPE. The service had recently undertaken a campaign about personal hygiene.

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.

People received their medicines as prescribed. One person told us, “Staff order my medicines and supervise me [when I take them].” Another confirmed, “I get help with medicines.” Staff were directed to administer medicines in the way in which people preferred them, at times suitable to them.