Inna Care

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 changed to 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.

Systems were in place to learn from lessons following incidents.

An accident and incident policy was in place that detailed the process to manage accidents and incidents and to learn lessons. Records showed that accidents and incidents were recorded along with action taken. The registered manager told us lessons were learnt where possible from each incident and shared with staff to ensure the risk of reoccurrence was minimised.

The provider worked with people and professionals to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care when people were being supported.

Systems were in place to capture information as part of the pre-assessment process to determine if the service can support people safely. This included speaking with the referring agency, the person and their relatives.

We saw the template used to record key information about people’s support and care needs to determine the support required. This information was used to inform the assessment process and ensure a smooth transition between services. The registered manager told us, where possible, people had the same carers to ensure relationships were built so people received continuity of care.

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.

There were processes to safeguard people from abuse and harm. The service had a safeguarding policy that detailed the types of abuse and how to escalate concerns if staff suspected or saw abuse, to ensure people were protected. A person told us, “I feel perfectly safe. They [carers] treat me like family and are so kind to me. They do everything for me.”

Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and understood how to protect people from harm and who to report to when required. Staff were able to tell us the importance of reporting any concerns to the management team. Staff also felt they could be open to the management team if they had any concerns. A staff member told us, “Abuse is any actions that harms or mistreats any people, can be physical, mental, emotional. Report it by first assessing the abuse then report to the office and if office does not take any action, then we see if we can report to external [organisations].”

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 to people were identified and risk assessments were completed to ensure people received safe care. Risk assessments were in place for people with specific health conditions such as risks associated with diabetes and Parkinson’s disease. Risk assessments had been completed for people at risk of skin complications and falls. Risk assessments included the risks and how to support the person to minimise risks.

The registered manager and staff were aware of the importance of having robust risk assessments to ensure risks were minimised and people received safe care and support at all times.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment.

Risk assessments had been completed on people’s home environment. Information included details on risks or hazards within the environment to ensure care and support could be provided to people in a safe way and risks to staff and people were minimised such as ensuring environment was clear of hazards when supporting people to minimise the risk of falls.

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.

During our last inspection we found staff were late for care visits as staff were not being given enough time to travel to care visits placing people at risk of harm as timely support was not being provided.

During this assessment, we found improvements had been made.

The service used a digital system to monitor staff timekeeping. The system alerted management if staff were late for calls, which then the office could monitor. A dedicated staff member was in place to monitor staff call logs. The system gave the service oversight of staff timekeeping. Management also carried out audits on staff timekeeping. The data showed staff generally arrived to calls on time. A person told us, “The carers have never been late or missed a call. They know I rely on them.”

The registered manager told us that they introduced systems to ensure staff were given enough time to travel to care visits and also offered transportation to care calls to minimise the risk of late calls.

There were enough staff to support people safely and staff knew people well. A relative told us, “I think they [carers] have enough time to complete the calls, and [person] says they are staying the time.” Another relative commented, “They are well trained, attentive and confident, so [person] is in safe hands.”

We found staff had been trained in a number of key areas such as with health and safety, first aid and moving and handling. Staff completed the Care Certificate training. The Care Certificate isa set of 16 mandatory standards for healthcare and social care support workers in the UK, developed by Skills for Care, Skills for Health, and NHS England. Staff were also trained on specific areas such as skin integrity, record keeping and on learning disabilities. A training matrix was in place that allowed management to have oversight of training including when refresher training was due. A relative told us, “There are a team of carers who come in to look after [person] and I would say they are all well trained.”

Systems were in place to recruit staff safely. Pre-employment checks had been carried out such as on criminal records and identity checks and references had been sought.

Staff had received regular supervision to ensure they were supported in their roles. A supervision matrix was also in place to ensure there was oversight that staff were being supported. Staff told us that they received regular supervisions and were supported. A staff member commented, “Yes, every 3 months (received supervisions) but any enquiry, we can talk directly to the team leader.” Another staff member told us, “Yes, our manager supports us. [Registered manager] is kind and always helps us.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. Systems were in place to prevent infections. Staff were able to tell us the process of ensuring people were protected from infections such as good hygiene protocols and wearing personal protective equipment and that they had been trained in infection control. Records confirmed staff had been trained on infection control. A relative told us, “They [carers] are very mindful of possible infections and always use their gloves when around [person].”

Medicines were managed safely. Robust systems were in place to manage medicines. The service used a digital system to record medicines administration. Staff signed the electronic medicines administration records (MAR) to show that medicines were given as prescribed. The system did not allow staff to move on to the next task until the MAR chart was completed in full. Management were alerted if MAR charts were not completed on time. MAR charts evidenced that people received their medicines as prescribed.

Care plans included the support people required with medicines and the type of medicines people needed support with.

Staff had been trained in medicines management and had received competency assessments to ensure they were competent to manage medicines. Medicines risk assessments had been completed when needed such as when people were on blood thinning medicines, which placed them at risk of excessive bleeding.