KB4Care Limited

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 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. A reflective practice approach was used to identify lessons learned and improvements following accidents or incidents. There was clear process in place following incidents which including keeping people informed, completing investigations, submitting appropriate notifications and identifying lessons learned.

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 received initial referral information which enabled them to carry out a more detailed assessment of people’s needs. There was effective communication and partnership working between the provider and local health and care services which ensured continuity of care and support for people.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way for this to be achieved. 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 had appropriate policies and processes in place which ensured any safety concerns were reported to the local authority. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were understood by the registered manager and there were processes in place to review people’s capacity in line with the MCA. The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). We found the service was working within the principles of the MCA. A member of staff confirmed they knew how to report concerns about safety, "Yes, I have access to safeguarding policies of the company. If I suspected abuse I will report it to my team leader, line manager or the safeguarding team in line with the company’s safeguarding procedure.” A relative told us, “[Family member] feels safe and comfortable with [members of staff] in the house. They are reliable and trustworthy.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs which was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things which mattered to them. People’s care plans were appropriately detailed and person-centred. We saw evidence of loop configurations in care plans for people who required hoisting. This ensured they would be supported to use this equipment safely. Risks associated with their care and support were identified and mitigations were in place.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Risks in people’s homes were assessed and where community equipment was in place, the provider kept a log of equipment safety test dates via pictures in people’s care plans. This ensured the provider monitored the safe use of equipment in people’s homes. A member of staff told us, " I have had training about manual handling and moving and handling of people. I was taught how to use hoists, slings, slide sheets and transfer aids safely."

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 which met people’s individual needs. The provider recruited members of staff safely. Appropriate pre-employment checks were completed which ensured people had the right to work and were safe to do so. Staff received training face to face and through e-learning courses. Staff training information was not well organised and although members of staff had accessed all required training and development courses needed to provide safe care and support, the provider needed to improve how they managed their training records so it was all maintained in a single system for easy reference and access. We discussed this with the registered manager and they committed to making the necessary changes.

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 had policies and processes in place which ensured good infection prevent and control practices. One member of staff said, "I have done IPC (infection prevention and control) training which covered hand hygiene, cleaning and disinfecting procedures and how to prevent the spread of infections." Another member of staff told us, “Yes, I do have access to all the personal protective equipment (PPE) needed for me to carry out my job effectively."

The provider made sure 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. The provider had policies and processes in place to monitor and review the administration of medicines. Members of staff received training to administer medicines safely and they confirmed they knew what to do in the event of a medication error. A member of staff told us, "[I would] report it to the manager, ring NHS 111 and explain [what happened] in case there was a risk of overdose." The registered manager confirmed there was a clear and consistent process for reporting medication errors including the action taken and learning identified. A relative told us, “One instance I was really pleased was when we left a note to [family member] to take their medicine and [family member] had taken it too early. [The member of staff] rang the doctor just to double check this was ok and luckily it was so they let us know.”