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

This service scored 78 (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. People and staff were encouraged and supported to raise concerns and staff felt confident they could do this and would be treated with compassion and understanding. Staff listened to concerns about safety and reported safety events. The management team investigated and reviewed any accidents or incidents involving people who used the service, in order to learn from these. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Information from lessons learnt and changes to practice were shared with the staff team through meetings and supervision.

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. When a referral was received, an initial assessment was completed which included gaining the person’s views, wishes and preferences. A care plan was developed using the information gathered during the initial assessment. Staff told us they were given information on how to support people who were new to the service and care plans were frequently updated when needs changed. One staff member told us they were not directly involved in carrying out needs assessments, but they were aware service users and their families or advocates were always included. They explained service users’ preferences, priorities and desired outcomes were always reflected in care plans, and they would report any newly identified or unmet needs to the care team so care plans could be updated in a timely way.

The provider had effective safeguarding systems in place to protect people from abuse, neglect, and avoidable harm. People reported that they felt safe, listened to, and supported.

The registered manager understood their responsibility to report safeguarding concerns, incidents, and allegations to the local safeguarding authority and to the CQC when required. Records showed that concerns were shared appropriately and in a timely way. This demonstrated a proactive approach to safeguarding and a culture which prioritised people’s safety.

Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and received appropriate training to recognise and respond to signs of abuse. Staff knew how to raise concerns and confirmed they would report safeguarding issues immediately to the registered manager. One staff member said, “I have access to safeguarding policies and training. If I suspected abuse, I would make sure the person was safe, write down what I saw or heard, and report it immediately following safeguarding procedures.”

We assessed whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We found mental capacity assessments were detailed, decision specific and reflected people’s individual abilities to make decisions about their care and support.

The provider had effective processes in place to identify, manage, and reduce risks to people using the service. People reported that they felt safe and confident that staff and managers would respond appropriately if they raised concerns.

The service identified and assessed risks to people’s safety and put appropriate measures in place to reduce those risks. This included support with nutrition, manual handling, and personal care tasks, ensuring care was delivered in line with people’s individual needs and preferences.

Staff regularly evaluated and reviewed risk assessments to ensure they remained up to date and relevant. The registered manager reviewed incidents and risk related information routinely, and staff updated care plans, so they reflected people’s current needs and enabled safe care delivery.

The service completed environmental risk assessments of people’s homes to ensure they provided a safe working environment for staff. Staff reported any health and safety concerns they identified during visits and followed the established reporting process for accidents, incidents, and near misses. These actions reduced the risk of harm and helped prevent avoidable accidents.

The provider took a proactive approach to safety and risk management by delivering targeted fire safety education. This included developing training films and practical guidance on circuit breakers and emergency responses. This preventative work strengthened people’s awareness of fire risks and emergency procedures and contributed to safer environments for people using the service, staff, and the wider community.

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

People received support in their own homes, and the provider completed risk assessments for each person’s environment, including fire safety risk assessments. The service ensured appropriate equipment was in place to support people to mobilise safely and receive personal care, such as hoists, walking frames, and slide sheets. Staff received training in the safe use of equipment and completed competency checks to confirm they supported people safely and appropriately. There were systems in place to ensure safe access when staff visited people to provide support.

The provider ensured there were sufficient qualified, skilled, and experienced staff who received effective support, supervision, and development. Staff worked well together to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The provider operated a robust recruitment process and completed all relevant pre‑employment checks before staff commenced employment.

Staff completed a comprehensive induction, which included knowledge checks, direct observations and competency assessments. Following this, staff shadowed experienced colleagues and only worked independently once they demonstrated competency. Staff said the training and support provided gave them the skills, knowledge, and confidence required to carry out their roles safely and effectively. A staff member said, “We undertake regular mandatory training in all necessary areas to meet legislation and requirements.” Another said, “Crossroads supported me well from the start. I completed induction training and additional training in safeguarding, moving and handling, first aid, dementia, autism, medication, and infection control.”

The provider supported staff through regular supervision and appraisal. Staff reported they felt well supported and found supervision effective. One staff member said, “I have regular supervision and appraisals with my manager. These meetings allow me to discuss my performance and raise any concerns or development needs.” The provider monitored staff performance through regular spot checks. Supervisors carried out unannounced visits during care calls to observe practice. This ensured care delivery remained safe, effective, and in line with expected standards.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Effective systems and procedures supported safe infection prevention and control (IPC). Staff had access to policies, received training, and were monitored through spot checks to ensure safe practice. Relatives told us staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) and kept their homes clean and tidy. One relative said, “The staff are ‘very clean and tidy. They [staff] wear gloves and always tidy up.”

Medicines were managed safely. A relative told us, “Medication is handled carefully with no issues. There's never been any problem with the medication.” Managers completed regular checks of medicine administration records (MAR) to monitor administration was completed correctly. Where there had been issues, we saw evidence of this being addressed quickly. Staff had received training in medicine administration and had frequent checks to ensure they remained competent. Staff told us, "Medication training is provided and refreshed. Any extra support needed is always available. If any medicine errors are made, we report it straight away to the manager on duty, then wait for instructions to follow and we record everything on an incident report.”