The Village Care Group 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 that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement.

This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

The service was in breach of 2 legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and staffing.

This service scored 56 (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 positive learning culture that was based on an open and honest approach. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Staff attended regular staff meetings and supervisions. These were an opportunity to discuss any additional learning or how improvements could be made to people’s care and support. Referrals were made to the local authority and health and social care professionals when required. Incidents were collated confirming the detail of the incident. However, improvements were needed to the providers documentation within their analysis, so it confirmed the outcome of an incident or accident along with any referrals and actions taken. We shared this feedback with the registered manager and provider so they could review and take any action needed to improve this.

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.

People were supported by staff who were familiar with their individual needs. Staff confirmed they were available to support people in the event of an emergency and all staff respected people’s wishes. People and their families felt able to call the staff in the office should they need to for any reason.

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 felt happy with the support provided by the service. One person told us, “Care and support is excellent.”

Staff received training in safeguarding adults, and they had a good understanding and knowledge of how to identify abuse and who to raise concerns with. The provider collated any safeguarding concerns and referrals and statutory notifications were made as required. Staff felt people got safe care.

People’s care plans held important information such as if the person had capacity. Although 1 person’s care plan contained limited information on best interest decisions relating to their care and support where it confirmed they lacked capacity. We raised this with the registered manager and provider who confirmed they would undertake a review of this person’s care documentation.

People told us they felt supported by staff who were respectful. For example, 1 person when asked if staff were respectful told us, “Respectful of course.”

The provider was not always ensuring all people’s care plans contained important support information about their individual needs. However, people received support from staff who knew them well.

For example, we found people’s care plans did not always contain all the information staff would need to support a person. This included where 1 person needed information about their catheter care, accurate medicines information and a risk assessment where there were risks relating to topical emollient cream. Another person needed accurate information about the medicine’s they were prescribed, their moving and handling guidance and risk assessment also needed more information to support staff with how to support this person with their individual needs.

Following our inspection the registered manager and provider confirmed they were reviewing people’s care plans and were planning to develop a compliance audit tool to review care plan documentation. People and their families felt supported by staff who knew them.

The provider made sure people had access to equipment and technology to support the delivery of safe care. However, some improvements could be made to having important information within people’s care plans such as where their utility supply might be in the event of an emergency. Where people had a pendant alarm and specific equipment this was documented within the person’s care plan.

The provider did not ensure people were supported by staff who had completed training to ensure they had suitable skills to support people with their individual needs. We found improvements were needed to ensure the provider had suitable employment documentation and processes in place for staff who were employed by the service.

For example, we found the provider was not ensuring safe recruitment checks were being undertaken consistently prior to staff being employed by the service. We found 3 staff did not have a start date confirmed within their contract. One member of staff had a contract signed prior to their references being provided. They had also undertaken training for the service. One other member of staff had a contract signed prior to their DBS (Disclosure and Barring service check) being completed. They had also undertaken training for the service. We were informed by the registered manager and provider they had identified improvements were needed to the recruitment procedures for staff and they were starting to make these improvements.

People were supported by staff who knew them well. However, we found the provider was not always ensuring staff were working within employment legislation. We raised this feedback with the provider and registered manager so they could review this and take any action necessary. We also shared this information with other agencies so they could review and follow up with the service if needed.

Staff undertook an induction that provided them with training such as safeguarding people from abuse, safe management of medicines, moving and handling theory, infection prevention and control. Some staff had received bespoke training in epilepsy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) feeding. However, we found not all staff had received training to ensure they had suitable skills and knowledge to support people. For example, some staff needed training in equality and diversity, practical moving and handling, learning disabilities and autism and diet and nutrition. The registered manager and provider confirmed during the inspection they were aware that some staff needed this training and they were taking action to address this.

Staff felt supported with team meetings and supervisions, and senior staff undertook competency checks.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. People were supported by staff who received training in how to use personal protective equipment safely. Staff had access to personal protective equipment, and they were able to request additional supplies when needed. Staff had a good understanding of when to use gloves and aprons when supporting people with personal care and other care tasks.

The provider did not always ensure documentation relating to people’s medicines was accurate and up to date. Staff received training and competency reviews relating to the safe administration of medicines.

For example, we found improvements were needed to 2 people’s care plans and medicines administration documentation as this was not always accurate and up to date in these different documents. We also found improvements were needed for 1 person who had a topical cream that posed a possible fire risk as no risk assessment had been completed to identify this risk.The provider confirmed following our inspection they had made improvements to training staff and implementing risk assessments.