Greatful 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. 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 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 service had procedures in place to record accidents, incidents and learn from events that occurred. Staff reported incidents and accidents to the registered manager and recorded information within people’s daily notes. Incidents, accidents and people’s daily notes were audited monthly by the registered manager. Where there were any lessons to be learned, this was communicated to the staff as a memo and shared during staff meetings. This helped to drive improvements and learn lessons.

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.

Systems were in place to capture information as part of the pre-assessment process. This helped to determine if the service could safely support people and meet their needs. As part of the transition process with the service, the registered manager spoke to people’s relatives, when needed. This helped the service to find out as much information about each person. The registered manager told us when other services were involved with people’s care, clear communication was maintained.

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.

Safeguarding processes were in place for the staff to follow and any concerns were reported appropriately. This included internal reporting and making safeguarding referrals to the local authority safeguarding team. A log of accidents and incidents were kept by the registered manager. Staff received safeguarding training and were confident about what to do if they had concerns. We asked the staff how they would report any concerns about people’s safety. A staff member told us, “I would report any concerns immediately to my manageror the office.” Another staff member told us, “I would report any concerns about the people I care for by contacting my manager immediately. I would also record the details electronically and in the communication book, to ensure the concern is documented properly.”

People and their relatives told us, they felt they received a safe service from Greatful Care. A relative told us, “My relative has 2 calls a day, 1 carer each visit. They feel totally safe; the carer always introduces themselves and shows their ID badges”. Another relative told us, “When they are moving them out of bed into the chair there is always 2 carers. They trust the carers.”

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 specific to each person’s needs and contained detailed information. Risks had been assessed in relation to people’s mobility, environment, health needs and emotional wellbeing. People’s care plans contained information about how risks to people were to be reduced. For example, the number of staff needed to assist people with moving and handling. The registered manager told us the staff knew people well and had a good understanding of their needs and managing risks. People and relatives felt risks were being managed. A relative told us, “Their mobility isn’t good and they require support, predominantly they are in bed. When they are moving them out of bed into the chair, this is done safely. They trust the carers.” We asked the staff how they helped to ensure risks were managed and people received safe care. A staff member told us, “I keep people safe by following their care plan, checking the environment, and making sure I use safe techniques.”

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 registered manager carried out environmental risk assessments of people’s homes and equipment was checked regularly. These assessments were completed as part of the pre assessment, when first meeting with people. The registered manager monitored environmental risks and acted quickly to reduce hazards, for example by reviewing risk assessments. Staff were aware of lone working protocols and contingency plans.

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.

Staffing levels were sufficient to help meet people’s needs, and rotas were managed by being sent out electronically, 1 month in advance. People told us they had not experienced any missed visits or lateness. The registered manager told us they had enough staff and that further staff, would be recruited as the service expanded. The staff used a system to sign in and out of each visit. This helped the registered manager to monitor people’s visits. People experienced continuity of care, and staff had time to deliver care without feeling rushed. A relative told us, “The carer turns up on time and stays the length of time expected”. Another relative told us, “They receive 4 calls a day from 2 carers. If they are ever running late, they call to let me know, they always stay the length of time expected”.

Staff recruitment records confirmed the completion of right-to-work checks, criminal record checks, reference checks, induction, competency assessments, and regular supervision. The training matrix showed the staff had completed all mandatory training.

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.

People confirmed the staff wore Personal Protective Equipment (PPE); gloves, aprons, and masks when required, and disposed of this safely. The registered manager ensured sufficient PPE supplies were maintained and they showed us the stock they kept at the office.

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.

People’s medicines were managed safely and Medicines Administration Records (MARs) showed that people’s medicines had been administered as prescribed. Medicines audits were carried out by the registered manager, to ensure people received their medicines safely. Training records confirmed staff had completed medicines training and competency assessments had been undertaken. People did not raise any concerns in relation to how their medicines were administered. A person told us, “Medication is administered by the carers they are very vigilant and make sure it is taken when expected.”