Voyage (DCA) Rotherham

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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. We saw examples of learning being shared and changes being made to improve the care and support people received. The provider understood their responsibility to report notifiable events and informed relevant authorities, including CQC, when required. This helped promote an open culture, reduce the risk of similar incidents happening again and support people to receive safe care.

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 service worked well with other health and care professionals to support people when their care needs changed. A clear assessment process was in place to identify people’s individual needs and plan their care. Hospital passports and communication passports provided important information about people’s health, care and communication needs. This helped professionals understand how best to support people and promoted safe, consistent 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. People told us they felt safe living at the service and knew who to speak to if they had any concerns. The service had clear safeguarding processes in place to help protect people from abuse and harm. A person told us, “The staff keep me safe.” People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In supported living services, this is done through the court of protection. The service was working within the principles of the MCA, mental capacity assessments were detailed and specific to individual decisions. This helped staff understand people’s abilities to make choices and provide support in line with their rights and needs.

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. People’s care plans and risk assessments were detailed and identified risks to their health, safety and wellbeing. These included clear guidance for staff on how to support people with specific dietary needs or mobility needs. Staff knew people well and understood how to manage risks based on their individual needs. This helped people receive safe, consistent and person-centred care, while reducing the risk of harm and supporting their independence.

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 service had systems in place to ensure people’s homes were safe and well maintained. Regular checks and audits were completed to identify and manage risks within the home environment, including fire safety. We found the supported living environments were well maintained. This helped reduce the risk of harm and supported people to live in safe, comfortable homes.

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.Many people required extended periods of one-to-one support. We reviewed people’s care plans alongside staffing levels and found staffing arrangements reflected the support people required. Staff told us there were enough staff available to meet people’s needs. People and their relatives also confirmed staffing levels were sufficient. This helped ensure people received consistent care and the individual support they needed to remain safe.

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 service had systems in place to manage and reduce the risk of infection. Infection prevention and control policies were in place, and we observed sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) was available for staff to use. Staff received training to help them understand and follow safe infection control practices.

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. Staff completed competency assessments to ensure they had the skills and knowledge needed to administer medicines. Regular medicines audits were carried out, and the management team maintained oversight of medicines practices. However, at one of the services we identified issues with medicines stock and missing protocols for medicines prescribed to be taken as and when required. (PRN). These concerns were addressed promptly following our feedback. This helped reduce the risk of medicines errors and improve the safety of medicines management. A person told us, “I get my medicines when I need them.”