Snowball Care UK 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. 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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were involved in their assessments and reviews of their care plans. The care plans we viewed had been reviewed recently and showed people had agreed to these. People said they were happy with the support provided by the service and felt safe. They told us staff supported them safely and were responsive to their needs and preferences. We saw evidence the provider had engaged with other health and social care professionals to meet people’s needs. For example, the records we viewed showed where people were moving to other services, the provider had liaised with these services to ensure they understood their care needs. They had supported and enabled staff trusted by people to move with them to other services. This was confirmed by people we spoke with.

Staff and leaders described the work they had undertaken to ensure people were involved in their assessments. They told us people were asked about how and when they wished care and support to be delivered. People's feedback and the records we viewed confirmed this. The registered manager told us they had liaised with other providers to ensure people had easy and effective transition to new services.

We received feedback from a commissioning Local Authority. They told us that, although there had previously been concerns about people's assessments, they recognised the service had made improvements to address this.

The provider had policies and procedures in place in relation to assessment, care planning and monitoring. These reflected current best practice.

People told us they felt safe from harm or abuse. They received the care and support they required from trained, competent and caring staff. People told us they had received information about safeguarding and knew who to contact if they had any concerns about their safety. A person's family member told us, “I rely on the carers to keep [relative] safe when I am at work and I need to know that he is being well cared for so I don’t have to worry about him.”

Staff understood the importance of safeguarding and were able to describe what this meant in relation to their care practice. Managers and staff were aware of their roles in immediately reporting and recording any suspicion of potential or actual harm or abuse to people. They knew concerns should be immediately reported to the relevant Local Authority and notified to the CQC.

The service had an up to date safeguarding policy and procedure. Staff had received training in safeguarding at induction. Safeguarding training was 'refreshed' annually. The provider's policy and procedure was discussed at team meetings.

People told us they had been involved in developing their care plans and risk assessments and were satisfied with these. They were provided with up to date copies when there were any changes. People were satisfied with the ways risks were managed by staff.

Managers and staff understood the identified risks to people and were aware of what they needed to do to reduce these. Staff were familiar with people's risk management plans. They told us they were informed immediately if there were any changes. Staff members described how they had meetings with the registered manager following an incident to enable them to understand and discuss how to reduce any likelihood of occurrence in the future.

The service had a policy in relation to management of risk. People's risk assessments had recently been reviewed and updated where required.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were confident about the skills and experience of the staff who supported them. They told us they received care and support from the same staff members who were reliable. People were advised if staff were running late for care calls and informed if there were any changes due to staff absence.

The registered manager told us it was essential the service recruited trustworthy and reliable staff.

Staff were safely recruited. The staff files we viewed showed checks of suitability had been carried out prior to recruitment. Checks included references, criminal records, ID, and eligibility to work in the UK.

Staff had received regular supervision from a manager. Core staff training was provided at induction and refreshed annually. Spot checks of their competency in provided care to people in their own homes had also been carried out. The provider used an electronic call monitoring system to manage care visits to staff. Staff were required to log in at the beginning and end of care visits. This was monitored live by office and on call staff and immediate action taken if a call had not been logged on the system. 3 people chose not to use the electronic system, and the records we viewed showed office-based staff contacted them regularly to ensure they had received their care visits at the correct times.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.