Cura Care

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 was the first inspection 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 management team supported safe, effective care by promoting a positive learning culture where staff were encouraged to reflect, develop skills and improve practice. There was a clear emphasis on reflective practice, peer reflection sessions and learning from experience. Staff engaged in regular supervision and reflective discussions, which focused on understanding behaviour, emotional wellbeing and trauma‑informed practice. The management team promoted openness, learning and psychological safety, and staff felt confident to raise concerns and contribute ideas. They actively used learning from national guidance, such as Learning from Lives and Deaths reviews (LeDeR). The LeDeR is a program aimed at improving care and reducing health inequalities for people with learning disabilities and autistic people.

Staff worked with the person and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. The person experienced safe and well-managed transitions between services. Care plans were developed before service commencement. Staff worked closely with a wide multidisciplinary team, including social workers, commissioners, GPs, SALT, occupational therapists and specialist nurses. Staff acted as coordinators of care, ensuring referrals, appointments and information sharing were timely and appropriate. Systems supported safe transitions, including a complex move from a care home back to the person’s family home, with legal frameworks, assessments and care arrangements in place to protect wellbeing and safety.

Staff worked with the person and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving the person’s life while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service had effective systems to identify and respond to safeguarding concerns. Staff understood their responsibilities and described safeguarding processes as prompt and supportive. One staff member said, “I have had to raise several safeguarding concerns to my manager, and I have been really reassured that these were dealt with properly and promptly each time.”

Staff worked with the person to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet the person’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled them to do the things that mattered to them. Risk assessments and care planning were completed with the person and families, reflecting individual needs, communication styles and preferences. Staff understood behaviour as communication and used proactive approaches to reduce distress and prevent escalation. Risks were balanced with opportunities for independence, community access and meaningful activity.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. Environmental risks were assessed and managed in the person’s homes, with adaptations made to support mobility, comfort and safety. Equipment and assistive technology were introduced following specialist input, and further adaptations were planned to increase autonomy.

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 the person’s needs. Staffing levels and skill mix were matched to the person’s needs, with a stable and consistent staffing model. A staff member said, “We are a team of four and there is enough staff to be able to support people effectively.” Recruitment practices were meeting requirements. The suitability of staff was checked not only at the pre-interview and interview stage but during the induction training. The provider promoted a learning culture and ensured staff had access to a wide range of training. Staff supervision sessions were completed in line with the provider's policy.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Staff followed infection prevention and control protocols, including appropriate use of personal protective equipment and regular audits.

Staff made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met the person’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff who administered medicines had the appropriate training and competency checks. The management team systems were in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and as prescribed.