J.C.Michael Groups Ltd Basildon

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has improved to 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 approach to safety for people using the service and staff based on openness and honesty. Care workers were alert to safety concerns and reported incidents to line management for further investigation.

Lessons were learned from safety incidents or complaints, resulting in changes improving care for others. Lessons learned were shared through the staff team and embedded into daily practice.

People and staff were encouraged and supported to raise concerns. A care worker told us, “Supervisors and management are approachable and willing to listen to concerns or suggestions, I feel encouraged to express my thoughts without fear of judgement which contributes to a healthy work environment.”

The provider worked with people, relatives and external health and social care partners to establish safe systems of care for the benefit of all people using the service.

An external professional told us, “Staff are vigilant and responsive to risks, ensuring [people’s] safety at all times.” They went on to say, “The team’s proactive approach in keeping both myself and the social worker informed of any incidents in a timely manner is particularly commendable. Their willingness to attend meetings and contribute meaningfully to discussions further highlights their commitment to collaborative working and person-centred care.”

At the previous inspection we had identified the provider's safeguarding processes were not always effective. The provider had reviewed their safeguarding processes to ensure information was correctly recorded and appropriate notifications were raised to the relevant authorities. The provider showed us they had a clear oversight of actions taken to safeguard the people they supported.

People’s relatives told us they believed their relatives were receiving safe care.

For example, a relative said, “I believe that the staff involved looking after [relative] are providing safe care. I've seen this whilst being there [and] whilst staff are on duty.”

Records showed safeguarding training was provided for the whole team. Staff told us they were confident the management team acted upon any concerns escalated to them. For example, a staff member said, “When I raise any concerns aboutpeople, I receive prompt response from the management team. For example, I delivered care and support to a person in their own home and it was difficult to lock the entrance door when I finished. I communicated with the management and someone was sent immediately to resolve the issue while I continued with my remaining calls.” This showed us prompt action was taken to promote people’s safety.

Care workers provided care for people that was safe, supportive and enabled people to live their lives the way they wished. Risks were assessed relating to the individual support people needed. These risk assessments covered areas such as engaging with the community, eating and drinking, finances, mobility and medication.

Staff understood how to reduce risk and keep people safe using the control measures resulting from a balanced and proportionate approach to risk assessment.

The management team reviewed incidents and information about risks routinely. People’s care plans were updated where needed to help ensure care workers had access to up to date information.

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

At our previous inspection we had found the provider’s recruitment processes were not always completed properly to help ensure only fit and proper staff were employed to care for people. At this inspection we found robust recruitment processes had been implemented to help make sure all staff were suitably experienced, competent and able to carry out their role.

At our previous inspection we had received mixed feedback about the timing of people's care visits. At this inspection feedback from people’s relatives was positive in this regard. Staff felt they had sufficient time allocated to provide people with safe and effective care. One care worker told us, “I usually have sufficient time during care calls to provide quality care without feeling rushed, and I believe our service is safe and person-centred.”

The provider used an electronic system for monitoring the punctuality and duration of people's care visits. This was analysed monthly and adjustments made as necessary.

Staff received training appropriate and relevant to their role, this was refreshed at regular intervals to help ensure the continuity of care and support provided for people. Staff received the support they needed to deliver safe care including supervision, appraisals and spot checks.

Staff at all levels had opportunities to learn and develop. The provider operated a mentorship scheme; the registered manager and branch manager were mentors for staff from other branches operated by the provider. For example, in areas such as learning how to be a care coordinator or branch manager.

The provider operated an effective approach to assessing and managing risks of infection, in line with current relevant national guidance.

Staff protected people from the risk of cross infection by following good infection prevention and control practices. Staff had completed training in how to reduce the risk of infection and their practice was assessed by senior staff at spot checks. A care worker told us, “Personal protective equipment (PPE) has always been readily available, and infection control procedures are taken seriously.”

The provider ensured medicines administration was safe. Care workers received training to support them to administer people’s medicines safely and a competency assessment was undertaken before they were able to administer medicines. Competency assessments were undertaken annually or before if any concerns were identified.

Accurate and up-to-date information about people’s medicines was available. This was particularly important when people were involved with various health and care settings or changing levels of care.

People’s relatives told us they had no concern with how care workers administered people’s medicines.