Gilead Complete Care Group 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

This was the first assessment of this registered service under a new provider, and we therefore assessed all quality statements associated with this key question. Based on the findings of this assessment, our rating for this key question is good. People were kept safe and were protected from avoidable harm, and care workers understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding procedures. The provider followed current guidance regarding infection prevention and control.

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.

People and relatives we spoke with told us they had not been involved in any incidents so felt unable to comment on the learning culture at the service. Although they had trust that the management team would learn from any incidents that did occur.

Staff knew what to do in the event of an accident or incident and were aware of how to report these. A care worker told us, “I need to report it to the registered manager, and I need to fill out an incident form, I want to make sure the resident is safe and hasn’t injured themselves.”

There had been no incidents or accidents at the service which was confirmed by the registered manager. Nothing we saw indicated otherwise. The service had a policy for staff to follow should things go wrong, and we saw there was an incident form template to use should staff need to.

The registered manager told us any learning from any incident, accident or complaint would be shared with the staff team via a team meeting or supervision meeting.

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.

People and relative felt they received a safe service. People and relative told us they felt listened to and able to raise concerns or complaints. They were aware of who they could contact if they needed to raise any concerns.

The registered manager told us they took account of all information available from the person, their family and any health care professionals involved in their care, when supporting their transition to the service.

We did not receive any feedback from external health and social care professionals, however records seen indicated there were no concerns in this area.

The provider carried out an assessment of people’s needs before they began to use the service. This meant they were able to plan any resources such as staff rotas and visit plans.

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.

People, and their relatives, told us they felt safe receiving a service form the provider. One relative said, “Yes, [person] is safe.”

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures. They knew how to recognise and report abuse and were able to tell us the signs of abuse. A member of staff told us, “Safeguarding means to protect the clients from harm, we have to write everything down and report it to the manager.” The registered manager understood their legal responsibility in relation to reporting any safeguarding concerns. She confirmed there were no current safeguarding concerns.

Safeguarding adults’ policies and procedures were in place. There had not been any safeguarding concerns raised since the service started operating.

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.

People and their relatives told us they were involved in planning their care which involved managing any risks to their safety.

Staff were aware of the risks to people and the steps they would take to keep them safe form harm.

Care plans included details about possible risks to people and how to manage the risk. The registered manager carried out spot checks on staff which included observing that they supported people in a safe way. Training records showed staff had received relevant training such as moving and handling.

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

People told us staff helped to keep their homes free from clutter.

Managers and staff told us they supported people to live safely in their homes.

Where people required the use of aids for safe moving and handling risk assessments were in place to support staff to be able to use this equipment safety. An environment risk assessment was completed to ensure safety of the person.

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.

There were appropriate staffing levels and skill mix to make sure people received consistently safe, good quality care that met their needs. A comment from a relative included, “Yes, we have the same carer, so we know we are safe as we know them.”

Staff said they were happy with the training and support they received. A member of staff said, “They give good training. Its face to face and online.” Staff told us they felt supported by their managers and were able to discuss any issues in individual supervision and team meetings.

There were robust and safe recruitment practices to make sure that all staff were suitably experienced, competent and able to carry out their role. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were carried out. These provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff received the support they needed to deliver safe care. This included supervision, appraisal and support to develop and improve services.

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.

A relative said, “The carers wear PPE when they are doing personal care. “

Staff confirmed they had completed training in infection prevention and control and demonstrated a good understating of the measures to manage and prevent the spread of infection.

We saw that the provider had policies and procedures regarding the prevention and control of infection, and they kept staff up to date with relevant national guidance.

None of the people using the service required support with medicines at the time of the assessment, and records indicated no concerns in this area.

Staff told us they had received the appropriate training and were confident in administering medicines to people, when required.

The provider had effective medicines management systems in place. For example, staff had received training in medicines administration and there were relevant up to date policies in place.