Selekt 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 newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

The provider had systems in place for learning from any safety concerns. There were policies covering safeguarding allegations, accidents and incidents and complaints. The registered manager told us there had not been any safeguarding allegations or accidents and incidents since they first became operational in December 2024. However, there had been a complaint made by a relative. We saw this was dealt with appropriately in line with the policy and that lessons had been learnt.

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 with others to help ensure a smooth transition between services. Senior staff carried out an assessment of people’s needs prior to the provision of care. People and their relatives were involved in these assessments to help ensure they reflected the needs and wants of the person. Assessments covered needs including personal care, medicine and moving and handling.

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.

Systems were in place to help protect people from the risk of abuse. The provider had a safeguarding adult’s policy, although they told us there had not been any safeguarding allegations since the service became operational. Staff had undertaken training about safeguarding and understood their role in reporting any concerns. One member of staff told us, “I would raise a concern to my line manager.”

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.

Risk assessments were in place for people. These set out the risks people faced and included information about how to mitigate those risks. They covered risks including moving and handling, fire safety and medicines. Assessments were subject to review to help ensure they reflected risks people faced as they changed over time. Staff had a good understanding of the risks individuals faced and how to support team in a safe way.

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 supported people living in their own homes and did not have responsibility for the maintenance of the premises or of any equipment used. However, to help ensure care was carried out in a safe environment, they had carried out environmental risk assessments.

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 enough staff to support people in a safe way. At the time of inspection, the service only provided care to 2 people. The registered manager told us this made it easy to monitor that staff were punctual, through regular contact with people. People told us staff were punctual.

The provider carried out checks on prospective staff to help ensure they were suitable to work in the care sector. These checks included proof of identification, the right to work in the UK and employment references. The provider also carried out criminal records checks. However, for one member of staff, they did not carry out their own check but relied on a check done by a previous employer 10 months before they started working for Selekt Care Ltd. We raised this issue with the registered manager. They sent us confirmation shortly after our inspection visit that they had now completed their own criminal records check on the relevant member of staff.

Staff undertook regular training to support them in their role. This included the completion of the Care Certificate. This is a qualification designed specifically for staff who work in the care sector.

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.

There were systems in place to help prevent the spread of infection. Staff wore personal protective equipment [PPE] when providing support with personal care. A member of staff said, “Our manager always makes sure that we have enough [PPE].” A person told us, “They [staff] always wear gloves and aprons.” Staff had also undertaken training about infection control. In addition, the provider had a policy on infection prevention and control to help guide good practice in this area.

The provider did not always assess or manage the risk of infection. They did not always detect and control the risk of it spreading or share concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The provider supported 1 person with their medicines. Staff undertook medicine training which included an assessment of their competence in this area. Medicine administration records were maintained which staff signed after each medicine was given. These were checked by the registered manager when they carried out spot checks. However, completed medicines records were not checked by the registered manager. We discussed this with them, and they told us they would implement a system for checking completed medicines records.