Unique Community Services Leeds

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 newly registered 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. 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 systems in place to record accidents and incidents, and the management team reviewed these to identify themes and trends. Areas of concern, as well as examples of good practice, were highlighted and shared with the staff team. This approach supported continuous learning and improvement. The consistent review of incidents helped embed safer practice and contributed to improving safety for people using the service.

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 management team completed assessments of people’s needs before care and support commenced, and ongoing reviews were carried out to ensure information remained current. The service worked collaboratively with people, their families, and other healthcare professionals to support safe and coordinated care.

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. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff had received appropriate safeguarding training and had access to relevant policy guidance. The management team investigated, responded to and reported safeguarding concerns; they also submitted the required statutory notifications to CQC. Most relatives told us they felt their family member was safe. Comments included, “Yes, they are safe, they get on well with the staff”, “[relative] is safe, yes. I know that [relative] can be very challenging and complex.” And “'I've always wanted to be able to trust them [care providers] and I never thought I'd say it, but I do, they take the pressure off the family and allow me to have a relationship with my [relative] without all the worry”.

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.

Staff worked alongside people to ensure activities were carried out safely and in line with their individual support needs. Risks were assessed appropriately, and where people chose to participate in activities that may be considered risky, additional assessments were completed to ensure these were managed in the least restrictive and most positive way.

Relatives told us their family members were supported to do the things that mattered most to them. One person told us, “They understand [relative]. I’ve never met a care company like it, it’s so good and I’ve had a lifetime of places. [Relative] gets out and about regularly, horse riding, football, swimming, shopping and they like being outdoors. They got her a bike for her birthday and one for a staff member too so they can go on bike rides together.”

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 were effectively supported to ensure they did not place themselves or their tenancy at risk. Individual homes were appropriately risk assessed, and measures were in place to promote safety while maintaining people’s independence.

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 had implemented safe recruitment processes and maintained an appropriate recruitment policy to ensure suitable staff were appointed. Staff received regular supervision and appraisal to support their professional development. They completed an induction programme and undertook regular training, including training specific to supporting people with a learning disability and autism. Relatives told us they felt staff were well trained. One person told us “'Staff seem to be coping well with [relative], so they must be well trained. They [staff] take him to a variety of places.”

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 had access to appropriate personal protective equipment, and the provider had an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy to guide practice. Staff received relevant training and supported people to maintain the cleanliness of their homes, helping to reduce infection risks and promote a safe living environment.

The provider did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff did not always involve people in planning.

We found evidence that staff were administering over‑the‑counter pain relief that had not been prescribed for the person. When this was discussed with the management team, they advised that they would ensure the medication was prescribed by the person’s GP as a PRN (when required) medicine. They confirmed this would then be stored and recorded safely in line with medicines management requirements.