Veemu Healthcare Office

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.

The service has been operational since 20 August 2024. The registered manager told us to date there had not been any significant accidents or incidents, safeguarding allegations or complaints received. People and their relatives we spoke with also confirmed this.

The service had a policy for staff to follow should things go wrong, and we saw there was an incident form template to use should staff need to. The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of how to respond to any such incident. Relevant policies provided guidance about how to respond if necessary.

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.

People and relatives received a safe service. A person told us, “I was fully involved in my care from day one”. A relative told us, “Yes, I am still involved in the care planning and reviewing of care for my relative.” People and relatives told us that they were aware of who they could contact if they needed to raise any concerns.

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.

People, and their relatives, told us they felt safe receiving a service from the provider. People confirmed they knew how to raise complaints or concerns.

The registered manager told us there had not been any safeguarding allegations since the service became operational. Appropriate systems were in place to help protect people from abuse and neglect. The provider had relevant policies including safeguarding adults and whistleblowing. The safeguarding policy made clear the providers responsibility for reporting any allegations of abuse to the local authority and Care Quality Commission.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures. They knew how to recognise and report abuse and were able to tell us the signs of abuse. A member of staff told us, “If I observe any changes in a person’s behaviour or see any bruises, I will report it to my manager. I will follow the safeguarding policy. If my manager does not take any steps, I will report it to the safeguarding team in the local authority or police.”

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 care plan we reviewed provided information about the person’s past life, family life, hobbies, interests, lifestyle, people actively involved in providing care and support, and the potential risks to the person. Appropriate risk assessments were completed to mitigate the risks to the person using the service.

People and their relatives told us they were involved in planning their care which involved managing any risks to their safety. A person told us, “I have been involved in care planning and reviews. The registered manager still asks us questions about my visits to the healthcare appointments, any changes in my medicines and overall well-being.”

Staff were aware of the risks to people and the steps they would take to keep them safe from harm.

The registered manager was also actively involved in providing care and support to the person using the service. There were systems and processes to monitor quality of care. We looked at the templates, such as a random spot checks form. Training records showed staff had received relevant training, such as Infection Prevention and Control, Medicine Management, Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults.

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

The provider had carried out environmental assessments which involved risk assessments relating to the environment which covered things such as slip and trip and hazards in the person’s home, use of stairs and shower of people’s homes to ensure support was provided in a safe way.

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 registered manager told us as they only had 1 person using the service. It was easy to monitor staff punctuality. There was a staff rota in place. The registered manager told us that if the service grew, they had plans to introduce a system of electronic monitoring to check staff punctuality and that staff stayed for the full amount of time.

People and relatives confirmed care visits were regularly carried out by the same staff member, so there was continuity of care.

People’s initial assessments determined the level of support people required in their homes and the rotas showed there were sufficient numbers of staff scheduled to work in accordance with people’s needs.

There were robust and safe recruitment practices to make sure that all staff were suitably experienced, competent and able to carry out their role. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were carried out. These provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. All the staff undertook a comprehensive induction programme which included opportunities like shadowing, mandatory trainings and refresher trainings courses.

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.

The provider had a process in relation to managing infection prevention and control. The provider had a policy in place on infection prevention and control to provide a clear guidance to staff in this area. Staff confirmed they had completed training in infection prevention and control and demonstrated a good understating of the measures to manage and prevent the spread of infection. Staff were provided with personal protective equipment [PPE].

Staff collected PPE from the head office. Staff told us they had access to enough personal protective equipment (PPE) to keep people safe when providing care.

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.

The person using the service was assessed by the provider for self-administration of medicines. On our visit, we found that the provider was using medicine administration record (MAR) charts to keep a record of changes medicines and for their medicine audit purposes.

The provider worked with the person and their relatives to ensure changes in medicines were reflected on MAR charts. Relevant supports such as reminders, and medicines audits checks were completed by the service provider. At the time of our assessment, we reviewed medicine records, and no concerns were identified. The medicine records were kept up to date and appropriate risk assessments were also completed.

The provider had effective medicines management systems in place. For example, staff had received training in medicines administration and there were relevant up-to-date policies in place.