Leda Homecare

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

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 registered manager 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 raised any concerns about people’s safety with management. Staff and management learnt from accidents and incidents and made improvements when needed to reduce future risks. Where shortfalls in staff practice were identified, these were addressed appropriately, to ensure people received care which reflected good practice.

The registered manager 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 registered manager and staff worked with community agencies to ensure people received the care they needed to manage any risks to their health and well being. Referrals were made to community agencies when people needed specialist support or equipment to keep them safe in their homes.

There was a Business Continuity Management Plan in place, which addressed events which could potentially disrupt the service, such as adverse weather or shortage of staff due to an outbreak of infection. Emergency contacts for management, staff and utility companies were included. This meant there was a safe system in place to ensure that, in challenging times, support could be provided to those who needed it most.

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.

Safeguarding concerns and incidents were managed appropriately. The registered manager ensured they were investigated and any action needed to protect people from abuse or avoidable harm was taken. Staff completed safeguarding training and knew the action to take if they suspected a person was experiencing or at risk of abuse or neglect.

People were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The registered manager ensured people’s capacity to make decisions about their care was assessed. When people lacked the capacity to express their wishes, their relatives or representatives were consulted to ensure any decisions made were in their best interests.

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.

People and relatives told us staff provided safe care and support. One person commented, “Well it is a fantastic service. Of course I am safe with them”. A relative told us, “I am sure [family member] is safe with them, they are very careful with him.”

Any changes in people’s needs or risks were discussed with them, or where appropriate their relatives, to ensure any additional support needed, such as extra visits, additional staff or adaptations to their home environment, could be arranged.

People’s care plans and risk assessments contained detailed information to guide staff about how to support them safely.

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 registered manager ensured people’s home environments were assessed, so that they and the staff who supported them could be protected from avoidable harm. Where improvements were needed to keep people and staff safe, such as more appropriate equipment or furniture, action was taken. This helped to ensure people were living in an environment which was safe and met their needs.

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 were happy with the staff who supported them. They felt they were skilled and competent. One person told us, “They are well trained, they treat me like a king. The district nurses say they do a wonderful job for me.” Records showed staff had completed the provider’s required training. Their competence was assessed during regular spot checks (observations of staff practice while providing care).

Most people told us staff visited them on time and stayed as long as they should. Some people told us staff were not always on time, but this was not an issue for them and staff usually informed them if they were running late. One relative told us staff did not always visit on time, and this was a problem for them. We discussed this with the registered manager who contacted the person to resolve the issue.

Staff were recruited safely. Appropriate checks were made before staff started working at the service to ensure they were suitable to support people in their homes.

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 told us staff followed safe infection prevention and control (IPC) practices when supporting them, including hand washing and appropriate use of personal protective equipment. A relative told us, “They come once a day for personal care. They all use their gloves and aprons; they don’t rush at all.”

Staff completed IPC and food hygiene training. The staff we spoke with understood the importance of good IPC practices and could explain how they supported people safely.

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.

Medicines were managed safely, in line with national guidance. People told us they received their medicines as and when they should. Changes in people’s medicines were discussed with them or their relatives when appropriate.

Staff completed medicines training and the registered manager ensured their competence to administer people’s medicines safely was assessed.