Clarity Homecare Leeds & Bradford Also known as Clarity Homecare Bradford

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 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. Accidents and incidents were being recorded by staff. Events were logged by the registered manager and analysed monthly to support lessons learnt. The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that.

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 registered manager told us that they go out prior to care starting to complete a pre-admission assessment, this was to ensure the service could meet the person’s needs. People told us their care plan would be agreed with them and their families. People were happy with the transition to the service. Comments included, “We were served notice by another provider; we contacted Clarity and the manager was great. They came out to see us and set up her care plan and everything first. It was really reassuring and a smooth transition.”

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 service had not received any safeguarding concerns, however, the registered manager fully understood that safeguarding concerns were to be investigated and responded to in a timely manner. The registered manager also understood the requirement to submit statutory notifications to CQC. People who used the service felt safe. Comments included, “Yes, I feel safe with the carers.”

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. Care plans were person-centred, and people told us they were involved in their care. Comments included, “Yes I have a care plan and yes I can have access to it, they review it with me I am involved.”

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 had risk assessments with good detail in to help staff manage the risks in people’s own homes. The registered manager and staff also told us they check any equipment before using it. Comments included, “Always do a risk assessment, we check the person’s home is safe from hazards and check all equipment for people before using it, reporting any concerns.”

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. We reviewed staff files which showed us that staff were recruited safely with mandatory checks completed. The staff training matrix showed staff were up to date with all mandatory training. We reviewed people’s visits were mainly on time and staff stayed the full duration of allocated call times. There were no concerns raised by people or staff in relation to staffing levels.

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. There were infection prevention and control (IPC) policy and processes in place. Staff told us they knew how to wear and dispose of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and the importance of hand washing. Comments included, “We have to wash our hands regularly, we wear gloves and aprons, we also wear a mask if there is an increased risk of infection.” People raised no concerns in relation to IPC, comments included, “Yes they clean up for me, and they do wear gloves and aprons when they are here.”

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. We saw evidence of care plans and risk assessments that supported staff to manage people’s medicines safely. The provider also provided evidence of Electronic Medication Administration Records (EMAR) audits taking place. Staff told us that the registered manager completes spot checks when they are in visits with people, checking they are competent in administering medicines safely. Comments included, “The manager comes out to check our work in spot checks, this is including medication, this is to ensure were doing everything correctly.”