Medow Care Services Limited

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 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.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

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 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 did not always make sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. They did not always make sure staff received effective support, supervision and development. They did not always work together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs, and this was confirmed by people using the service, their relatives and staff. However, deployment of staff and monitoring lateness needed to continue to improve. Most people’s care was provided on time; however, some people told us staff could be late at times. One person said, “The carers usually arrive on time. Occasionally they are a little late, but I understand that previous visits can sometimes overrun.” We found that travel time for some calls was not built in, meaning carers did not all have sufficient time to travel, which resulted in some lateness. There were no missed calls, and all care that required two staff to be present were safely carried out. Staff stayed the full length of the planned call or left when the person asked them to finish early. We did not find that people were at risk of harm or experienced harm, but people described how this impacted their plans some days. Recent staff departures due to expiring visas and the introduction of a new computerised call monitoring system had contributed to a recent dip in timeliness. The provider was aware and was in discussions with the system developer to improve their understanding of the system.

Staff were provided with training in key areas such as safeguarding adults, moving and handling, medicines administration and dementia. However, dementia training was for awareness and not of a sufficient level to ensure staff have the correct level of understanding to support those people. Some areas of mandatory training had not been completed by all staff once they had expired. However, people told us they felt safe with staff and felt confident in their skill and competence. One person said, “I do not have any concerns about the carers, and I am happy with the support they provide. If I need additional help from a nurse or doctor, the carers inform the manager so that the right support can be arranged. I feel that I am being well looked after by the service.” However, ensuring the right training is regularly delivered is important to ensure safety and to maintain the highest levels of care quality. The provider responded by sourcing appropriate training and developing an implementation plan to deliver all required training by the end of September 2026.

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.

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.