Bradcare 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 remains 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.

The provider told us about the systems they had in place to ensure learning took place when things went wrong and how this was shared with the wider staff team.

Systems were in place to learn lessons from incidents, complaint and safeguarding concerns so they could be analysed for patterns and trends.

The provider was open and transparent about incidents and accidents that occurred, they were recorded and reported appropriately.

The majority of staff were confident in the leadership and felt confident that concerns raised by them would be listened to. Staff told us their learning was continuously updated to ensure people’s changing needs were met.

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.

There were systems in place to ensure people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Where possible the provider worked with partner agencies to facilitate a planned transition. People had care plans and risk assessments which were based on the assessments completed and these were reviewed and updated when needed.

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 felt safe and supported by regular staff that knew them well. The provider understood their responsibilities to report safeguarding concerns and knew what to do if they had concerns about abuse or neglect. Staff confirmed they received safeguarding and whistleblowing training which included updates.

People told us that when needed, staff supported them safely to move around their home. One person said, “I have equipment that the staff use to support me [to move]. They have been trained and know how to use all the equipment, so I feel safe with them.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risk. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Risks were assessed on an ongoing basis and actions put in place to mitigate them. Records were in place that demonstrated that accidents such as falls were reviewed and measures put in place to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

Staff understood people’s individual risks. Risk assessments and care plans were in place to guide staff on how to support people safely. People told us staff followed these to ensure they were supported in a safe way. Risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure the information was accurate.

The provider assessed potential risks in people’s home environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Risk assessments were undertaken of a person’s home environment before the care package commenced. This ensured both the person being supported and the staff team were safe from any potential hazards or risks.

There were gaps in essential training that needed to be completed to ensure people were supported in a safe way. We fed this back to the provider to address.

There were enough staff employed, and people told us staff turned up within the agreed call time. Some people did say they would like to be informed if there were any changes to the roster. People told us that overall staff interactions were positive and meaningful and not only based on tasks. However, some people told us that there was a language barrier with some staff. They told us this impacted on the level of conversation they could have.

Whilst recruitment procedures were in place, improvements were required to ensure all required checks were kept on file to evidence these had been done. We found gaps in employment on some staff application forms with no record to show this had been explored with them. Although records stated that a DBS had been received, the DBS numbers were not recorded. It was stated on records that people’s right to work in the UK had been checked but these documents were not accessible to review.

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.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection.

People were supported by staff to keep their homes clean. Staff confirmed they had received training and there was enough Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) available for them to use. This was monitored by the management team who completed spot checks.

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.

Systems were in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and as required.

People were supported to take their medicines when they needed them. One person told us, “The staff get my tablets ready for me, so I don’t have to worry about that.” Care plans and risk assessments were in place to guide staff. Including guidance for staff on when they can give ‘as required’ medicines such as when people expressed pain.

People told us their medicine was stored safely in their homes. Staff and records confirmed they had received training, and their competency was checked to ensure they were safe to administer medicines to people.