All4One 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 for 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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider had not experienced incidents or complaints at the time of inspection but did have systems and processes in place, which would support learning from incidents where people may have been at risk. We saw the provider’s systems and processes promoted people’s safety as a priority, whilst not limiting their choices. People were supported and empowered to make informed choices and take calculated risks as safely as possible.

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.

The provider had effective systems and processes in place to make sure that solid relationships with healthcare professionals were established to help maintain people’s safety. People’s care records demonstrated effective communication and ‘joined up working’ throughout people’s care journeys. The provider's policies, procedures, and processes were in line with current, relevant legislation.

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.

Staff understood how and when to share concerns. A member of staff told us, “If I had concerns I would speak to my line manager. If they didn’t listen; to their manager and, if still no one listened, I would report to CQC or local safeguarding authority.” At the time of inspection there had been no safeguarding concerns raised about the service.

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

People were supported to maintain their independence. Care plans detailed the support they required to remain safely in their own homes. People’s care plans clearly indicated how staff should support people to manage known risks to their health or what they should do if a person’s health deteriorated.

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

Managers undertook environmental assessments of people’s homes to understand how staff would best support them. This included identifying risks to falls and mitigating these where possible and appropriate.

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.

Staff had received a robust induction that comprised of online and in person training, shadowing experienced staff and competency spot checks before supporting people independently.

The provider told us that, at the time of the assessment, they had a regular agency staff member supporting people in their own homes. They had made sure appropriate training was completed and safeguarding checks were carried out for the person. The provider also carried out regular supervisions and observations of care practice. There were effective contingency plans in place to cover care staff during unexpected absence.

Staff had to sign in and out of people’s homes. If this did not happen at the times identified in the person’s care plan, managers received an alert and quickly followed up to ensure the member of staff was safe and that the person received the care they needed.

The service sponsored some overseas staff. Staff records showed that all staff had undergone safe recruitment checks prior to them supporting people.

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.

Staff understood the infection prevention control policies and procedures and had undertaken appropriate training. The provider ensured that all staff had appropriate access to protective equipment and means to safely dispose of waste.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People receiving support were mostly independent in managing their medication. However, where people did need support, managers undertook regular medicines audits, which included reviewing all the administration records on an electronic system. Staff would often help people with tasks, if they were unable to do these for themselves, such as collecting medicines from the pharmacy so they did not run out.