Zach's Care

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 inspection we rated this key question Requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

People were safe using the service. Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew how to report concerns if necessary. There were enough suitably trained and competent staff to support people with their care visits. Risks to people were assessed and mitigated as far as possible and people were supported safely with their medicines.

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. When incidents and accidents happened, these were reviewed and discussed with the staff team so any improvements could be implemented. The management team had several documents they used to monitor improvements and help make sure actions were being taken to improve the experience for people using the service. People told us staff changed their practice if something went wrong. One relative told us, ‘‘[Family member] had a fall so we had to get [piece of equipment] to support them. [Staff] were quick to learn how to use this and as a result they have been able to support quickly.’’

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. Staff contacted professionals such as GP’s or emergency services if people needed support. If professionals gave advice that needed to be followed, this was recorded and staff followed this to help sure people were supported safely back to using the service. The management team made sure any changes to people’s support after visiting other services were clearly recorded and shared with the staff team. One relative said, ‘‘I am confident the staff team will follow any advice [health professionals] give.’’

People and their relatives told us they/ their family member were safe using the service. Staff were trained in safeguarding and knew what signs may indicate potential abuse and how to report concerns to external partners such as the local authority or CQC. Safeguarding concerns were reported, and any actions were taken seriously by the management and staff team. One person said, ‘‘I feel very safe and secure with the staff team. They know what they are doing.’’

The management team had assessed risks to people in areas such as supporting them to walk, medicines and living with health conditions. However, some of these risk assessments were not detailed and did not give sufficient guidance to staff about how to mitigate risks. The management team took action during our inspection to update these and make them more detailed. Staff were knowledgeable about the risks people faced and how to support them to be safe. People and relatives told us staff supported them to stay safe and reduce risks. One family member said, ‘‘The staff really are very good. You only have to show them how to do something once and then they get on with it. They know how to keep [family member] safe.’’

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in people’s home environments. They made sure equipment, and technology supported the delivery of safe care. People’s home environments had been risk assessed, and measures were put in place to help mitigate risks as far as possible. Staff told us how they made the environment safe, for example by ensuring hallways were clear and well-lit. One family member told us, ‘‘The staff are very respectful and know the house is [family member’s] home. They make sure things are kept how [family member] likes it.’’

There were enough staff to support people safely. People’s care visits were completed on time and staff stayed for the duration of the visit. People told us staff were flexible and would change care visit times if people needed them to. Staff confirmed they always had enough staff during care visits and had enough time to both travel between care visits and stay the full duration of the visits. If staff were running late, they rang ahead to let people know. One family member said, ‘‘[Staff] come on time, they are very punctual usually but will always let us know if they are held up at the visit before, for example. We always know who is coming too which is great.’’

Staff had the training they needed to support people and their competency to support people was checked after their training. Staff were knowledgeable about their training in area such as supporting people living with dementia, food hygiene and health and safety. The provider recruited staff safely in line with legislation to help ensure they were suitable for their job roles. One family member told us, ‘‘The staff are very capable and certainly know what they are doing. I have never had any concerns about their competency.’’

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. Staff were trained in infection and prevention control (IPC) and told us they had the necessary equipment to keep people’s homes clean. One family member said, ‘‘Staff will often go above and beyond in tidying and cleaning up after [family member]. They do things to help out which is really nice.’’

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 were trained to safely administer people’s medicines and their competency to do this was regularly checked. The management team audited and had checks in place to make sure medicines were being administered safely. One person said, ‘‘I take my own medication and only need the staff there to help make sure I take the right amount. This is very important to me.’’