ABR Grace Solutions 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 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 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.

While there had been no previous accidents or incidents, the provider was able to clearly describe the processes in place and demonstrated an understanding of the importance of notifying the appropriate organisations.

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 worked closely with other services to establish safe systems around care. There were positive examples of effective multidisciplinary working to maintain people’s safety. Staff implemented support to help individuals manage risk.

People received an initial assessment before starting their care package, and this information was incorporated into their care planning documentation.

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.

Although the provider had not raised safeguarding concerns prior to our assessment, the registered manager and staff were able to clearly explain the safeguarding process. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood their responsibilities in recognising and reporting potential abuse or neglect.

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.

Documentation showed that meetings had been held with both the family and the person using the service. A comprehensive risk assessment was also in place.

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

Risk assessments included consideration of environmental risks. Staff were aware of these environmental risks, and they were discussed during supervision sessions.

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.

The provider did not monitor actual call times. However, the family reported that staff stayed for the full planned call duration. Staff had appraisals, an induction, and regular supervision. Spot check records evidenced that the provider monitored the care delivered by staff as part of their quality assurance processes. Staff were up to date with the relevant training.

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 were trained in infection prevention and control (IPC), and an IPC policy was in place. IPC practices were monitored through regular spot checks, and staff demonstrated good awareness of the required procedures. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was readily available.

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

Staff did not currently support people with their medicines. The registered manager was able to explain the arrangements they would implement should this responsibility change in the future.