MNG Care at Home Services Ltd Also known as Visiting Angels North Shropshire

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 learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider promoted a positive learning culture which supported safe care. Staff understood their responsibilities to report incidents and felt confident to raise concerns. One staff member told us, “If there were any issues I would raise these with the office and would be confident they would be dealt with”. Incidents were recorded, reviewed and used to identify risks and improve practice. Learning was shared with staff through supervision and staff meetings, with people’s care plans and risk assessments updated where needed. The management team encouraged an open approach, and actions from incidents were monitored to reduce the risk of recurrence.

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 worked collaboratively with partners to ensure safe continuity of care. Information was shared appropriately when people’s needs changed, including during hospital admissions or transfers between services. Care records were updated promptly to support consistent and safe care delivery. Staff supported people to have their needs met safely by working alongside and following guidance given by health professionals including occupational therapists, district nurses and GPs. Staff liaised with health professionals on behalf of relatives when needed to ensure people’s health needs were fully understood and people received the care they needed.
 

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.

People were protected from abuse and neglect. People told us they felt safe when being supported by the service. One person told us, “I feel safe and comfortable with the carers”. One person’s relative said, “We are well treated by staff. They are very safety conscious and careful”.

Staff understood safeguarding processes, recognised signs of abuse and felt confident to report concerns. One staff member told us, “We would report any potential abuse on the system and then inform the registered manager by phone. The management are very good and would definitely take the right action if we had any concerns – they are available 24/7 for you, no matter what the time”.

Safeguarding incidents were reported appropriately, and the provider worked with external agencies to ensure people were protected. Records showed timely action was taken, and learning was used to improve practice.

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 were involved in decisions about managing risks in a way which balanced safety and independence. Risks were assessed and regularly reviewed, with care plans reflecting people’s preferences and current needs. We saw comprehensive risk assessments around mobility, moving and handling, medication, and skin integrity, amongst others. One person’s relative told us, “We were involved at all stages of [person]’s assessments and reviews”. Staff understood how to support people safely while promoting choice and control. One staff member said, “People’s needs and risks are recorded in their care plans”.

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 were supported safely in their own homes. Environmental risks were identified and managed through assessments and care planning. Where concerns were identified, guidance was provided to reduce risks and staff were aware of how to maintain people’s safety within their homes. Staff checked equipment during visits and reported any concerns promptly. We saw the provider made timely referrals to relevant professionals to ensure people’s equipment was safe and maintained.

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 ensured there were enough suitably skilled staff to meet people’s needs safely. Staffing levels were planned and adjusted to reflect people’s changing needs and preferences. Staff told us there was enough time to support people and complete visits as required. One staff member said, “Call lengths are 60 minutes minimum, which gives us time to do what we need without rushing. There is enough time to travel between calls”. People received their care calls at the right times and care staff stayed for the full duration of the care calls. One person told us, “My calls are usually on time and the carers stay for the agreed time. If for any reason they are going to be late I am always informed by the office”.

Recruitment processes were carried out safely. Satisfactory Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were required before staff were permitted to work on their own. Staff received a robust induction, and ongoing training, supervision and support to ensure they could meet people’s needs safely. One staff member told us, “All of our training is face-to-face. We have a bespoke training room in the office with moving and handling equipment”. Another staff member said, “I feel like I’ve had the right training to be able to do my job effectively. I know that if I needed any additional training I could just ask for it and it would be sorted”.

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.

Effective infection prevention and control (IPC) practices were in place. Training and updates ensured staff understood good hygiene practices, supporting people to stay safe in their own homes. Staff we spoke with demonstrated they understood the importance of safe IPC practices and they used PPE effectively and in line with guidance. One person’s relative told us, “Staff always put on gloves and aprons when entering and remove them when leaving”.

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.

Medicines were managed safely. Staff followed clear procedures for administering, recording and storing medicines in people’s homes. Training and competency checks ensured staff were safe to give people their medicines. One staff member told us, “I have had medicines administration training, and we also have competency checks to make sure we are administering medicines properly”. Errors were reported and reviewed, and learning was used to improve practice and reduce risks. One staff member said, “If I encountered a medicine error I would raise an alert on the system and I would contact the office to let them know”. When as required (PRN) medicines were prescribed, people had detailed protocols in place guiding staff on when to administer these. However, staff did not always record why these medicines had been administered or the outcome of administering them. The registered manager told us they would address this immediately.