Winsford 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.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.
 

This service scored 63 (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. The provider had systems in place to record and manage incidents and accidents. Actions and lessons learnt were shared with staff to promote learning and embed good practice.

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 had implemented a recovery to home provision within the service. They worked in partnership with other health professionals to support people with rehabilitation, reablement, and short-term support following illness or hospital admission. This recovery pathway enabled people to regain independence and return to living independently in the community. One person using the recovery to home service told us, “I feel safe here and I would recommend it to others.”
 

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. During the inspection, we identified 1 safeguarding concern which had not been raised with CQC. However, the provider responded immediately, submitting a retrospective notification and reviewing their processes for triaging concerns to ensure notifications were raised appropriately.

The provider did not always work well with people to understand and manage risks. Whilst people had risk assessments in place, we found these had not always been updated to ensure they reflected people’s current needs. Information was not always sufficiently personalised and detailed.

Despite these concerns, people were supported by an established and consistent staff team who knew them well. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s personalised risks and knew how to minimise these. Staff provided care that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Following our feedback, the provider confirmed they were reviewing people’s risk assessment documentation to ensure information was up to date and accurate.
 

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure the facilities supported the delivery of safe care. During the inspection we found not all environmental risks had been identified and addressed. For example, we found 1 uncovered radiator and other radiators with covers which needed replacement. Equipment servicing and equipment safety checks were being completed. However, environmental risk assessments relating to fire safety and the condition of the building had not always been reviewed or updated to demonstrate recommendations by external contractors had been implemented.

Following our feedback the provider responded promptly, confirming they had arranged for external contractors to carry out a full review of the relevant risk assessments to ensure appropriate safety measures were in place. The provider also told us they had amended their environmental monitoring processes to ensure more robust checks were implemented straight away.
 

The provider made sure there were enough 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 had completed appropriate recruitment checks to ensure staff were safely employed. However, minor improvements were required in relation to checks on applicant’s employment histories. Following our site visit, the provider confirmed they had reviewed the relevant recruitment documentation to ensure all information was included.

Staff received relevant training to support them in their roles. The management team monitored staff training and competency to ensure any shortfalls or training needs were identified and addressed promptly.
 

The provider had not always assessed and managed the risk of infection. They had not always detected and controlled the risk of it spreading. During the inspection, we found the condition of some fixtures and fittings in the service did not promote good infection prevention and control. For example, we found bathrooms in need of renovation and refurbishment. This impacted on staff’s ability to maintain cleanliness and safe infection control.

At the time of the inspection, the provider had an environmental improvement plan in place which identified planned refurbishments. Following our feedback, the provider responded immediately, confirming the bathroom refurbishment had been prioritised and started with immediate effect.
 

The provider had not always made sure medicines were safely managed to ensure they met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. During the inspection we found as and when required medicines which did not have up to date protocols in place to provide staff with guidance on how and when they should be given. We also identified an administrative error which had not been picked up by the provider’s own medicines auditing processes.

The provider was prompt to take action, confirming the protocols had been updated and reviewing their processes for stock checking medicines on site.