Keyspring 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.

This is the first inspection of this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 66 (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. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. When accidents and incidents occurred, staff took appropriate action including seeking medical attention. The registered manager had a process in place to review incidents that occurred to identify any trends, patterns and lessons learnt and to share with staff to reduce risks to people.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. Systems were in place to ensure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. The provider visited people to assess people’s needs and agree the level of support people needed. New staff were introduced to people, and information shared with staff via an electronic care planning.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. Staff and leaders had received training in safeguarding adults and understood their responsibilities in reporting safeguarding concerns to the appropriate agencies. Staff members’ comments included, “I have done safeguarding training” and “If I had any concerns, I would report them.”

The provider had completed risk assessments for people and had put some measures in place to mitigate those risks. However, not all risk had been identified, with the identified risk transferred to a care plan with detail for staff to mitigate the risks. Care plans required more detail of the measures staff were to follow to keep people safe, including how to respond when people became distressed. This included guidance for staff about triggers and signs, how to de-escalate and reassure a person if they became upset. We discussed this with the provider, who told us it would be addressed. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs which was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. A relative commented, “[Name] is well looked after and safe in their [staff] care. I absolutely trust the girls [staff].”

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 associated with people’s individual environments were assessed before staff started supporting people within their homes.

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 relative commented, “Staff seem competent. They know what [Name]’s needs are.” Most people told us rosters were well managed, and they received support in a timely and consistent way. However, some people commented they did not know who was coming to their call and staff did not receive their rosters in advance. This was immediately addressed by the provider and people and staff now receive a copy of their roster a week in advance. Improvements were needed regarding staff recruitment to ensure people were recruited safely. New staff had pre-employment checks in place. However, a more extensive work history should be provided with any gaps in employment accounted for and evidence of any qualifications. Sufficient references, including a character reference if 2 most recent employers were not available to verify a prospective staff member’s suitability for their role were not all in place.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. When accidents and incidents occurred, staff took appropriate action including seeking medical attention. The registered manager had a process in place to review incidents that occurred to identify any trends, patterns and lessons learnt and to share with staff to reduce risks to people.

Improvements were needed to medicine management, so medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Medicines records were in place. Some people were prescribed medicines to be taken on a ‘when required’ basis. Guidance for how these medicines should be administered was not all person-centred. There were policies and processes in place to ensure people received their medicines safely. Staff received training and competency checks to observe how they managed people’s medicines safely. A staff member commented, “I have done safe handling of medicines training.”