IJB Healthcare 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

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.

Staff reported safety events, and the management team took responsibility for investigating them. There was an effective system for recording and monitoring incidents, with staff completing detailed reports after any event. Learning outcomes were shared with the staff team and embedded into everyday practice to reduce future risks. This approach supported continuous improvement and helped ensure people remained safe while using the service.

There was an on‑call system in place, ensuring a member of the management team was always available for advice and guidance.

The service had a policy for staff to follow should things go wrong. The registered manager held regular meetings with staff to discuss concerns and to decide appropriate actions to address those concerns. The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of how to respond to any such incident.

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 and their relatives we spoke with confirmed their loved ones received a safe service. A person told us, “Yes, I was involved throughout the care planning process. The registered manager talked to me about my needs, wishes and preferences.” Care Coordinator told us, “We carry out face to face assessment, involve the person and their family members when people move between services. We regularly review people needs”.

The provider also helped people and their relatives to access services like the local district nursing team for further care and support. People and their relatives told us that they were aware of who they could contact if they needed to raise any concerns.

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 and their relatives told us they felt their loved ones were receiving a safe service from the provider, and they confirmed they knew how to raise complaints or concerns. A person told us, “Staff made me feel protected.”

The provider investigated safeguarding concerns and shared the information with external agencies where appropriate. Appropriate systems were in place to help protect people from abuse and neglect. For example, the provider had relevant policies including safeguarding adults and whistleblowing. The safeguarding policy made clear the providers responsibility for reporting any allegations of abuse to the local authority and Care Quality Commission.

Staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding and the reporting of concerns. It was evident from discussions with staff that they were aware of the procedures to follow and the external agencies that must be contacted without delay if they suspected that people using the service were at risk of harm. A member of staff told us, “I make sure people are safe. If I see any abuse going on, I would report it to my manager immediately. If my manager does not take any steps, I would report it to CQC.”

The provider did not always work well with people to understand and manage risks. Staff did not always provide care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

The provider did not always ensure all risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were identified or provided enough detail as to how these risks should be mitigated. For example, A person had diagnosis of type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The care plan and risk assessment did not give enough information how staff should respond in situations when person’s blood glucose level is low (hypo) or high (hyper).

Another care plan we reviewed indicate a person can be verbally abusive and might express agitation due to their unmet need. The risk assessment did not provide enough detail to manage these situations effectively. Following our inspection, the provider has now completed both risk assessments.

Staff were aware of the risks to people and the steps they would take to keep them safe from harm. Training records showed staff had received relevant training, such as infection prevention and control, fire safety, and adult safeguarding.

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 had carried out environmental assessments which involved risk assessments relating to the environment which covered things such as slip and trip hazards, electrical appliances, gas appliances, and equipment’s used by care workers including hoists, and washing machines, to ensure support was provided in a safe way.

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’s initial assessments determined the level of support people required in their homes and the rotas showed there were enough staff scheduled to work in accordance with people’s needs.

The provider had Electronic Call Monitoring (ECM) system in place to monitor staff punctuality, and that staff stayed for the full amount of time required.

The provider had effective recruitment and selection processes in place which ensured people were supported by suitable qualified staff. We reviewed staff recruitment files and found that all required pre-employment checks had been completed which were in line with current legislative requirements. All staff undertook a comprehensive induction programme which included opportunities like shadowing, mandatory trainings and supervision meetings.

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.

Staff confirmed they had completed training in infection prevention and control and demonstrated a good understating of the measures to manage and prevent the spread of infection. Staff were provided with personal protective equipment [PPE].

Staff collected PPE from the head office. Staff told us they had access to enough personal protective equipment (PPE) to keep people safe when providing care. People confirmed staff wear PPE when they visit them in their homes.

The provider was inspected by NHS North East London Infection Prevention Control Team in May 2026 and they achieved 96% overall audit rating. The provider had an Infection Prevention Control (IPC) policy in place.

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.

We reviewed medicine records and no concerns were identified. The medicine records were kept up to date, and they were regularly audited by a senior member of staff.

The provider had effective medicines management systems in place. For example, staff had received training in medicines administration, and medicines competencies assessments were conducted and there were relevant up-to-date policies in place. Systems included all aspects of recording such as daily administration and auditing and checking procedures.