Vincentian Care Plus

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 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. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

A person using the service told us, “If I need to speak to the office they are always responsive and helpful. I did have a small issue years ago and this was resolved to my satisfaction. I would recommend them.”

A member of staff told us, “When things go wrong, we conduct a review or debrief. The issue is documented, and we hold a team discussion to share what happened and how to avoid it in the future. This helps create a learning culture and improves our practice.”

The provider had effective systems and processes in place, which helped enable learning from incidents where people may have been at risk. We saw the provider’s systems and processes promoted people’s safety as a priority, whilst not limiting their choices. People were supported and empowered to make informed choices and take calculated risks as safely as possible. Incidents and complaints were reported, recorded and investigated appropriately and changes were made where needed, to improve the care service.

The provider used feedback from people using the service to improve the quality of the service and enhance people’s experience.

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.

The provider had effective systems and processes in place to make sure that solid relationships with healthcare professionals were established to help maintain people’s safety. People’s care records demonstrated effective communication and ‘joined up working’ throughout people’s care journeys. The provider's policies, procedures, and processes were in line with current, relevant legislation.

A member of staff told us, “In my role, I am responsible for responding to out-of-hours emergencies, care staff calling off, ensuring continuity of care, and actively monitoring the Electronic Call Monitoring (ECM) system to prevent missed visits and ensure punctuality.”

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.

Staff consistently demonstrated their understanding of the importance of reporting any concerns about people. A member of staff told us, “I once noticed bruises on a client with no explanation. I followed the safeguarding policy by reporting it to my manager and completing a safeguarding referral. The local authority investigated, and support was provided to the client.”

People using the service and their representatives said they felt safe. People’s comments included, “I always feel safe in their [staff’s] care and have no complaints.” and, “I do feel safe, they [staff] are good at what they do and they check everything.”

The safeguarding policies and procedures followed current and relevant legislation. The provider had effective systems and processes to help ensure people were protected from abuse and neglect.

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 had effective systems and processes to assess and minimise risks that were identified for people using the service. Risk assessments were person centred and covered areas such as epilepsy and other individual health conditions, mobility, daily living and personal care requirements. Risks to people were assessed and plans were created collaboratively with people and their representatives to help manage those risks in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff said if they had concerns, or noted changes, with people’s mobility they reported these to the office, who then made a referral to the relevant healthcare professional.

People’s care plans contained up to date information and guidance for staff about the action they should take to manage identified risks and keep people safe. There were clear processes, which staff followed when they needed to report concerns, incidents and accidents. These processes helped enable the provider to have oversight of risks and ensure they were mitigated as much as possible. There were regular audits and people’s care plans were updated as soon as there were any changes or new risks were identified.

The provider had effective systems and processes to identify risks and hazards in people’s home environments. Environmental risk assessments were completed with people using the service and, where needed. Risk management plans were compiled to help mitigate identified risks as much as possible.

People said they had completed needs and risk assessments when they began using the service. These assessments also included health and safety for themselves, as well as staff, within their individual home environments.

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.

Electronic Call Monitoring (ECM) data regarding the reliability and punctuality of staff, showed most of the calls had travel time factored in. Staff said they mostly had enough time to do tasks and travel time was usually okay. Most people spoke positively about the staff’s timekeeping.

Staff told us they felt there were enough care staff employed by the service and most staff supported the same people on a regular basis.

A person using the service told us, “I am happy with the carers. They arrive on time and stay the full call time.” A person’s representative told us, “My [relative] is happy with the care. They [staff] are wonderful and mostly on time.”

All staff told us they had a good standard of induction which included training and shadowing. Staff said, “I have regular contact with my line managers and engage in quarterly supervisions and annual appraisals.” “My induction was exceptionally thorough.” and, “The training and induction I received at VCP have been far more comprehensive than in my previous roles.”

Staff told us that senior staff and management completed unannounced spot checks for quality assurance and competency.

Staff described a thorough recruitment process, which included completing an application form, interviews, references and police checks. A member of staff told us, “Our recruitment department looks to hire candidates that show qualities of a well moraled individual, as you cannot teach compassion or kindness – these come from within.”

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.

People using the service and their representatives told us the care staff were clean and hygienic in their practices and followed appropriate infection control procedures, which helped keep everybody safe. People using the service and their representatives confirmed that staff washed their hands and used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as gloves and aprons.

People made comments such as, “They wear PPE.” and “They wear gloves and shoe covers and they wash their hands as well.”

We also saw detailed information in people’s care plans that included clear instructions regarding staff following appropriate infection control measures.

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.

People and their representatives gave positive feedback about the support they received with medicines. One person told us, “They make sure I have taken it in the morning. It’s in the weekly pack.” Another person said, “They give me the pills with some water and make sure I’ve taken them. They document it on their phone.”

Staff completed training for managing and administering people’s medicines and their competency was checked at regular intervals.

We looked at audits of the electronic medicines administration records and saw that where any issues were identified, such as missed doses or coding used without explanations, action was taken by way of additional training for staff and close monitoring.

Staff were knowledgeable and clear about what they needed to do if there was an error with medicines administration. A member of staff told us, “I will either contact the GP, call 999, or take other appropriate action, depending on the severity of the mistake.”