Inspire Lives Care Services 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 of this 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, who was also the registered manager, had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. All of the feedback we received supported this. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events.

They knew the diverse needs and risks to people entrusted in their care through the knowledge and experience they held within their field. They had instilled a positive culture of safety within the service with systems and process underpinning this together with providing effective advice and guidance to staff where required. This assured us they had overall oversight and responsibility to ensure safe care was delivered.

People and relatives we spoke with had not raised any concerns relating to safety. They had confidence the service would keep them safe and knew how to raise concern. A relative said, “Yes. I believe [family member] is 100% safe.”

Staff were vigilant to any concerns surrounding safety. They understood their responsibility to escalate safety events to the management team. One told us, “It is our role [staff] to report any concerns straight away. I am confident in the manager when any issues are reported to them.”

Healthcare professionals also shared positive feedback regarding people’s safety. One told us, “The manager is knowledgeable about our patients needs and will seek advice and help from our team appropriately if they have a concern."

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. The registered manager responded promptly to referrals to the service they received and undertook timely assessments to ensure people received continuity of care. This included when people were at point of discharge from hospital, from community healthcare agencies and self-referrals.

Additionally, they made sure people received continuity of care, including when they moved between different services. The registered manager told us, “One person we were supporting was transferring to a residential setting some distance away from their home. I sent carers with the person when they transferred to help them settle in.”

The registered manager responded promptly to referrals from other services they received and undertook timely assessments to ensure people received continuity of care. This included when people were at point of discharge from hospital, from community healthcare agencies and self-referrals.

Systems were in place to share relevant information when people’s needs changed or if they moved between other services. A healthcare professional told us, “The agency, in particular kept in contact regularly with our team to raise concerns about symptoms and deterioration of the people they supported.”

People and relatives raised no concerns around the timeliness the service responding to referrals made.

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.

All the people and relatives we spoke with said they were safely supported by the service. One relative said, “They [care workers] are 100% on top of things and I feel strongly my [family member] is safe with them all.”

Staff had received safeguarding training and knew the safeguarding policy and procedure. They demonstrated a good understanding and awareness of the importance of Safeguarding and spoke confidently about recognising signs of abuse and keeping people safe from avoidable harm. One told us, “It is our responsibility to protect people from potential abuse, harm and neglect.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

The provider worked together with people and their relatives to understand, assess, and manage risks to their health and well-being. They had oversight of risk by having frequent dialogue and reviews of people’s care to provide ongoing assurance risk was continually managed effectively. One person told us, “I have specialist equipment in my home. They [care workers] know exactly what to do with it. They are great and I feel really safe with them.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Environmental risk assessments of people’s homes were undertaken as part of the assessment and care planning process. For example, risk assessments considered, but were not limited to, furniture, lighting and flooring.

People and relatives raised no concerns about staff practice in relation to environmental risk. Every person we spoke with told us staff were diligent when supporting them in their home.

An out of office hours procedure was in place for staff, people and relatives so managers could always be contacted for support. People repeatedly told us they could contact the service whenever they needed to, and staff confirmed out of hours arrangements were effective.

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.

A robust recruitment policy was in place, and followed, to ensure staff were recruited safely so, as far as possible, only suitable staff with the right skills and experience were employed.

Most people in receipt of the service had complex health care needs which required specialist care. All staff had received the necessary training to support people safely from relevant health professionals in line with people’s diagnoses and associated care needs. Face to face practical training was delivered to staff by professionals and their competency was assessed before care was delivered. One professional told us, “The service was competent at caring for people’s physical health needs and sensitive to the emotional nature of people living with life limiting illnesses.”

Training matrices also confirmed mandatory staff training was in date. Staff told us the training received provided them with the right skills to deliver safe care in line with current practice. They gave positive feedback on the overall induction, initial shadowing of care calls, and the ongoing training provided.

People told us staff arrived on time and stayed for the length of time agreed and carried out everything they were required to do. One person told us, “They [care workers] come 5 times a day because I need a lot of care, they are always on time.” A relative said, “They are excellent timekeepers, they even turned up in the snow!”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection effectively. People told us staff wore Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) when delivering care, and disposed of it safely. One person said, “They [care workers] always wear gloves and aprons and shoe covers. They also wear a mask because [family member] is on a ventilator and it’s important they do not get chest infections.”

Staff said they provided with adequate stock of PPE to manage the risk of infection whilst in people’s homes and, protect themselves from the risk of the spread of infection.

An infection prevention and control policy (IPC) was in place. Staff had undertaken infection prevention and control training and were knowledgeable about the correct measures to take to keep people safe.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. One person said, “I get my medication through my PEG [Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy]; [a tube that is inserted directly into the stomach to enable food, nutrition and medicine needs] and usually it is ok but sometimes the tube can get blocked. They [care workers] are good at unblocking it and when needed they call the nutrition nurse to come and change the tube.”

Staff we spoke with told us their training was in date and they received regular refresher training and competency spot checks by the registered manager. Our review of training records together with feedback we received from staff confirmed this.