Detailed Care 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.

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 learned to continually identify and embed good practice.

Accidents and incidents were audited regularly to ensure effective learning and improvement. A comprehensive log was maintained to record details, investigations, and outcomes. Appropriate actions were taken following each incident and were monitored to ensure completion and ongoing risk reduction.

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.

The provider completed pre‑assessment documentation and obtained consent to care at the person’s own pace, ensuring people felt informed, supported, and fully involved in decisions about their care. Each assessment was reviewed to confirm the provider could meet the person’s needs and deliver the appropriate level of support.

The provider adopted a person‑centred approach throughout the pre‑admission process. People were offered meet‑and‑greet opportunities with staff to provide reassurance and promote continuity. A person told us, “It is very easy to transition to this company. They gave me a number. They came out straightaway. Arranged for us all to be together to speak to us. They asked what I thought we needed. Good discussion. They held the meeting in the evening as suits my[family member].”Where possible, the provider allocated a small, consistent care team by limiting the number of staff involved.

Pre‑admission information was added promptly to care records and was accessible to staff. The provider used effective communication methods, including WhatsApp and telephone handovers, to ensure staff were fully informed and prepared to deliver safe, consistent, and person‑centred care from the outset.

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.

The provider completed a safeguarding audit to ensure safeguarding arrangements were effective and in line with statutory requirements. All staff were up to date with safeguarding training and demonstrated appropriate knowledge of safeguarding procedures and reporting responsibilities. People felt safe, with one person telling us, “They treat me very well. I feel safe with the carers.”

There were no safeguarding concerns raised or recorded in the previous year. Where safeguarding‑related queries arose, the provider liaised appropriately with the local authority safeguarding team for advice and clarification.

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.

The provider reviewed risk assessments and care plans on a regular basis to ensure they remained accurate and reflective of people’s needs. Risk assessments were checked at regular intervals, or sooner where changes in need or circumstances were identified.

Behavioural assessment tools were available for use; however, they were not required for people using the service at the time of the assessment.

People and staff supporting them were involved in the development and review of care records, ensuring care plans reflected individual preferences, wishes, and agreed outcomes.

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

The provider completed environmental risk assessments and incorporated relevant information into people’s care plans to ensure risks within the environment were identified, managed, and reviewed appropriately. These assessments supported people’s safety while promoting independence where possible. People told us the staff ensured the environment was safe. One person commented, “Yes, they check my home. They check that there are no trip hazards.”

Staff received lone working training to ensure they were aware of risks associated with working alone and understood the measures in place to keep themselves and people using the service 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.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place to ensure staff were suitable, appropriately skilled, and safely recruited. Recruitment checks were completed in line with safer recruitment requirements before staff commenced their roles.

The provider operated a structured supervision and appraisal process to support staff development and performance. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals, providing opportunities for reflection, support, and identification of training and development needs.

Feedback from an external professional supported positive staff conduct and professionalism. They stated, “They are always in uniform, appear to be punctual and reliable.”

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 completed regular spot checks on infection prevention and control (IPC), the use of personal protective equipment, and food hygiene practices to ensure standards were consistently maintained. Comments from people confirmed safe IPC practices. A person told us, “Yes, they wear aprons and gloves. They wore face masks a few weeks ago as there was a virus going around.”

IPC audits were carried out to monitor adherence to policies and procedures. Findings from audits were reviewed, and any required actions were identified and addressed promptly to support continuous improvement and reduce the risk of infection.

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.

The provider completed regular medication competency checks to ensure staff were suitably trained and competent to administer medicines safely. Medication audits were carried out to monitor practice, accuracy of records, and compliance with medicines management policies.

Protocols for ‘as required’ (PRN) medicines were in place for individuals and reflected personalised guidance on when and how these medicines should be used.