Caring Partners Healthcare Ltd

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. The service was no longer in breach of regulations relating to good governance.

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.

At the last inspection we found incidents and accidents were not consistently reviewed by the management team and there was not clear information about changes made to keep people safe. At this inspection we found this had improved. Incidents, accidents and near misses were recorded and reviewed by the management team to ensure actions were implemented. Learning from incidents was shared with all staff to ensure they understood changes in the way they needed to work. Staff told us this process worked well and they received clear, prompt information about any changes to the support people needed. Examples of changes to keep people safe included supporting a person to make their home environment safer, changes to care plans and additional training for staff.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

At the last inspection we identified shortfalls in the way risks were assessed and managed. At this inspection we found this had improved. Risk management plans had been reviewed since the last inspection and now contained more detail about the support people needed. People and their representatives had been involved in these reviews. People and relatives told us they felt safe when staff were supporting them. Staff told us risk management plans gave them clear information about the support people needed to manage any risks. Staff said plans were updated promptly when people’s needs changed.

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

At the last inspection we found guidance for staff on the safe use of equipment was not always recorded. At this inspection we found this had improved. The registered manager had consulted an occupational therapist regarding the safe use of a recliner chair and detailed guidance was now included in the person’s care plan. Environmental risk assessments had been completed and action taken to support people and staff to remain safe. Staff told us equipment such as hoists and wheelchairs were regularly checked and serviced to ensure they were safe. Staff said they had relevant contact details, such as wheelchair services, where they could report any issues with equipment.

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.

At the last inspection we found the provider had not always completed all the required pre-employment checks for new staff. At this inspection we found this had improved. One new member of staff had been recruited since the last inspection and all required pre-employment information had been obtained before they started work. These included a criminal records check, confirmation that thestaff had the right to work in the UK, a full employment history and satisfactory references from previous employers.

New staff received an induction, including opportunity to shadow experienced staff until they were confident. Staff told us they had realistic work schedules and received regular training and supervision.

People told us staff had the right skills and knowledge to meet their needs and arrived on time. Comments included, “The carers are very good and treat me well. They generally arrive on time and on the odd occasion they are running late I will get a call from the office.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

At the last inspection we found people’s medicines care plans did not always reflect the level of support staff were providing. At this inspection we found this had improved. People’s medicines care plans had been reviewed and now accurately set out the level of support staff were providing. People told us staff provided good support for them with their medicines. Records demonstrated people had been supported to take their prescribed medicines in line with their care plan. Staff received training in the safe management of medicines, and the management team observed their practice to ensure they were doing this safely. In addition to observations the management team had developed a new medicines competency assessment tool, which they planned to complete for all staff during January 2026.