JBS Consult 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 Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (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.

Systems were in place to learn lessons following accidents and incidents.

The registered manager told us that there had been no incidents, but should incidents occur this would be reviewed with relevant action taken and lessons learnt to minimise the risk of reoccurrence. An incident and accident policy was in place that detailed the process to managing incidents and learning from lessons following incidents.

The provider worked with people and professionals to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care when people were being supported.

Systems were in place to capture information as part of the pre-assessment process to determine if the service could support people safely. This included speaking with the referring agency, the person and their relatives where possible.

We saw that pre-assessment had been completed and used to record key information about people’s support and care needs to determine the support required. This information was then used to create care plans based on people’s preferences and choices on the support they required.

People had the same care workers to ensure relationships were built so people received continuity of care. A relative told us, “They know [person] very well and support [person] well. They have known [person] for few years, so they are consistent.”

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.

A safeguarding policy was in place that detailed the types of abuse and how to escalate concerns if staff suspected or saw abuse to ensure people were protected.

Relatives told us that people felt safe when supported by staff. A staff member commented, “Yes, people are very safe.” A relative commented, “It’s going well. [Person] is safe, they provide good care and support.”

Staff knew about safeguarding processes and had received training in this area. A staff member told us, “I have been trained on safeguarding. It is any form of abuse like physical, verbal and financial. If I see this, then I will report it to the management team. There is an incident form too that I will complete.”

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.

Risk assessments were in place to ensure people received safe care. Risks had been identified and there were risk assessments to ensure people were safe when being supported. Guidance was in place for staff to follow on what actions to take in relation to managing risks to make sure people remained as safe as possible.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment.

Risk assessments had been completed on people’s home environment. Assessment included assessing both external and internal hazards such as smoke alarms, electrical appliances, utilities, stairs and neighbourhood to ensure people and staff were safe.

The provider did not always make sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. They did not always make sure staff received effective support,

Regular supervisions had not been carried out to ensure staff were supported at all times. We found one staff member had received regular supervisions and had not received an appraisal having worked for the service for more than 12 months. The providers supervisions policy included that staff should receive a minimum of 4 supervisions per year. The registered manager informed us that they regular check in with staff to ensure they were supported but would ensure regular supervisions and appraisals took place.

Staff told us they were supported in their roles. A staff member told us, “He is very good manager. He gives support whenever we need it.”

Staff had completed key training which included safeguarding and health and safety. Specialist training was also completed, including in key topic areas such as caring for people with a learning disability. Staff completed the Care Certificate training as part of their induction. The Care Certificate isa set of 16 mandatory standards for healthcare and social care support workers in the UK, developed by Skills for Care, Skills for Health, and NHS England. A training matrix was in place that ensured oversight on staff training. We found some training had expired, the registered manager told us refresher training had been arranged and provided evidence to confirm this.

Staff told us they received training and induction. A staff member told us, “We did get an induction, which was helpful like explaining about service users and training. We got good training.” A relative commented, “They support [person] well such as with eating and providing care.” Another relative told us, “The staff are well trained, they look after [person] so well.”

The service used a digital system to monitor staff timekeeping. Staff had to log into calls prior to supporting people and log out when care was finished. The system gave the service oversight of staff timekeeping. Records showed that staff attended calls on time and there had been no missed visits. A staff member told us, “We can get to care calls on time. We log in and log out when we arrive and finish.” A relative commented, “We never had issues with poor attendance and time keeping.”

Records showed relevant pre-employment checks, such as criminal records checks, right to work in the UK, references and proof of the person’s identity had been carried out to ensure staff were of good character.

The provider had an effective approach to assessing and managing the risk of infection, which is in line with current relevant national guidance.

Systems were in place to control and prevent infection. Staff were able to tell us the process of ensuring people were protected from infection such as good hygiene protocols and wearing personal protective equipment. Staff had been trained in infection control.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

A medicine policy was in place. Medicine care plans were in place that included the type of medicines people were on and if they required support with medicines. Records showed people did not require support with medicines.

The registered manager told us should people require support with medicines then they would ensure staff were given training and competency assessed prior to administering medicines.