Care Never Sleeps 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 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. For example, we saw that when a safety incident occurred, the provider thoroughly investigated this, identifying the possible cause for the error and taking appropriate actions to prevent reoccurrence. This was shared with staff for learning, and we saw that a system was in place to ensure accountability for when things went wrong.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. People received care from the same small group of staff reducing the risk of people receiving unsafe and/or inappropriate care. We saw the service contacted, and worked with, healthcare partners as required and followed their recommendations.

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 had processes in place to help protect people from abuse and harm. These included ensuring staff were trained in safeguarding and learning lessons from safeguarding incidents. Staff were able to demonstrate they had the correct safeguarding knowledge and knew how to report safeguarding concerns both internally and outside of CNS Norfolk.

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. The relatives of people who used the service told us staff protected their family members from risk whilst encouraging their independence and autonomy. We saw that risks had been identified, mitigated, managed and reviewed. For example, where one person was at risk of pressures ulcers, we saw a risk assessment and care plan was in place and that staff followed guidance on mitigating the associated risks.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. We saw that environmental risks within people’s homes had been assessed to help protect people, and staff, from harm. Staff completed regular visual checks on moving and handling equipment and checks were completed to ensure equipment had been professionally inspected to ensure it was safe to use.

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. People spoke highly about the registered manager and the staff that delivered care. One relative described all the staff as ‘excellent’ whilst another relative said, “The quality of the personal care provided is absolutely exemplary.” We saw that staff were appropriately recruited, received regular formal and informal support, and training to build their skills and confidence. One staff member said, “The training has helped me feel more confident in my role and supports people to receive safer care.”

Whilst the provider did not specifically assess the risk of infection, they managed it in practice. For example, people told us staff were conscientious regarding infection prevention and control both in the care they provided to their family members and in maintaining the cleanliness of people’s homes. We saw that staff had received training on the topic and that audits were completed. However, the audit had failed to identify the need to formally assess the risk of infection. We raised this with the registered manager who gave us assurances that this would be completed going forward.

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. We saw that people received their medicines safely and as prescribed. Staff had received training in medicines management, and their competency to administer them assessed. When a medicines error had occurred, we saw the provider had investigated this and identified lessons learnt to reduce the risk of recurrence.