Global Caring Group Leicester

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 learned and used to continuously identify, share and embed good practice

The provider’s systems and processes supported a positive and effective approach to learning. There were clear processes for reviewing incidents, accidents, safeguarding concerns and other safety events to identify areas for improvement. Learning was shared with staff and used to inform changes in practice where required. Staff were encouraged to reflect on events and contribute to improvements, helping to reduce the risk of recurrence and supporting the ongoing delivery of safe, good-quality care.

Staff confirmed the provider’s communication and approach to learning were effective. A staff member said, “Information is communicated through the care management system, telephone calls, emails, messages and staff meetings. Important information about changes in people's needs is communicated to the relevant staff.”

Staff meeting and supervision records also provided an opportunity to discuss changes, safeguarding, incidents, lessons learned and improvements to service delivery.

Examples of incidents and actions to improve learning outcomes for staff, included additional training, support and discussions.

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 received a face-to-face pre-assessment before commencing the service. People and relatives confirmed they were fully involved in an assessment before care delivery. A relative said, “A manager came round and did a medical history, very amenable man. Very thorough.”

The provider had a pre-assessment procedure that ensured people’s known care needs and risks were assessed and planned for in advance of the care package commencing. This is important to ensure staff had the required knowledge and competency to meet people’s individual needs.

The provider’s electronic care records had a facility whereby they could share important information to assist others, such as health and social care professionals. This supported people in consistency and continuity of 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 received safe care. If concerns were identified about safety, prompt action was taken to protect people. People told us they felt staff provided safe care and raised no concerns about their safety. They confirmed staff wore a uniform and identification badge, which helped assure them of staff members’ identity and their association with the provider. One relative said, “Yes, they understand [name], I’m happy they are safe.”

Staff had completed safeguarding training and had access to the provider’s safeguarding policy. They demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities to protect people from abuse, neglect and avoidable harm. Staff knew what action to take if concerns arose, including the importance of reporting and escalating safeguarding concerns promptly. A staff member said, “If I witnessed something or someone disclosed abuse to me, I would make sure they were safe, listen carefully, not promise secrecy and report the concern immediately through the safeguarding procedure. If there was an immediate danger, I would contact the appropriate emergency service.”

The provider’s systems and processes for oversight and monitoring were effective in identifying and responding promptly to safeguarding concerns.

At the time of the inspection, the person using the service did not have a Community Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) in place that imposed restrictions on them for their safety.

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.

Risks associated to people’s care and support needs had been discussed with the person and or relative. People and relatives told us they were confident risks were managed safely and raised no concerns.

Risk assessments were detailed and up to date. Guidance for staff clearly identified people’s known risks, how these could affect them and the actions staff should take to minimise or manage them. Assessments reflected people’s individual needs and circumstances and included appropriate measures to keep people safe while supporting their independence, choice and control.

Where risks were linked to specific health conditions, staff had received relevant training to support their practice. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s known risks and the actions required to manage and mitigate these safely.

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

Risks associated with people's home environments and any equipment used to support care delivery had been assessed and were routinely monitored. These measures were in place to minimise potential risks to people and staff. They also supported the safe delivery of care within people’s homes. This included checking equipment servicing dates and ensuring equipment was in good working order and safe for use. Health and safety risks were assessed, and identified hazards were appropriately managed.

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 received consistent care from staff who knew them well. This was confirmed by people and relatives. A relative said, “I think that this was key, [name] wasn’t overwhelmed by different faces [staff] all the time.” Relatives considered staff to be sufficiently trained and competent. A relative said, “The staff have excellent care knowledge, and they can’t do enough for you.”

At the time of inspection, there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to meet people's assessed needs safely. Recruitment records demonstrated staff had been recruited safely, with appropriate pre-employment checks completed before they commenced work. Staff completed an induction and refresher training across a range of subjects relevant to their roles and responsibilities. Training records confirmed compliance was good.

Staff received regular opportunities to discuss their work performance, training and development needs through supervision, an annual appraisal and team meetings. The management team also completed spot checks of care delivery and competency assessments in areas such as medicines management and moving and handling, helping to ensure staff maintained the skills and knowledge required to carry out their roles safely.

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.

People were protected as far as possible from the risk of cross contamination and infection. People and staff confirmed personal protective equipment were worn when required. A relative said, “Yes staff wear protective equipment. Gloves and aprons, shoe covers at my request, and masks if any of them have a cold or infection.”

Staff training records and competency assessments confirmed staff had received required refresher training and spot checks in infection prevention and control practice (IPC). The provider’s IPC policy reflected best practice guidance.

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.

Where support was provided with people’s prescribed medicines this was done safely and in line with best practice guidance. A relative said, “All is fine with how medicines are supported and they’re [staff] very good at changing [name] weekly patch.”

Staff confirmed they had received training in medicines management and administration, and this included having their competency observed and assessed. Records confirmed this.

We reviewed a sample of medicines care plans, risk assessments and administration records. These contained detailed and personalised information about people’s prescribed medicines, the support they required, administration instructions, and individual risks and safety considerations. This provided staff with clear guidance to support the safe and consistent administration of medicines. Records confirmed people had received their medicines as prescribed.

The provider had safe systems and processes in place to plan, review and monitor medicines management. These audits and checks helped to ensure people received their prescribed medicines as intended and that any omissions, errors or concerns were identified and addressed promptly. This supported the safe management of medicines and reduced the risk of medicines-related incidents.