Limitless Care 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 – 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.

Staff described clear processes for recording and escalating incidents. Incidents and accidents were documented through digital systems and reported to stakeholders appropriately, with additional actions such as contacting relatives or emergency services when required. Records evidenced that lessons were learned and prompt actions taken as a result of incidents. There was a consistent understanding of safeguarding and training had been completed through both online and face-to-face sessions.

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.

Admissions were completed safely with good evidence of partnership working with other professionals, such as district nurses, hospital practitioners and GPs. Information gathered on the person was clearly captured in people’s care plans. In addition, external stakeholders provided positive feedback for the service in relation to liaising with office and care staff when assisting with arrangements for appointments or when coordinating care between organisations, which showed continuity of care and good practice.

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 told us they felt safe while receiving support from the service and described feeling reassured by having regular care staff. One person said, “I trust the carers absolutely. If I had concerns, I would ring the office,” while another noted, “[my relative] is safe. It is reassuring to have them visit. Gives me peace of mind.”

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of incident reporting, safeguarding, and escalation processes, supported by training and structured systems. Incidents were documented digitally and shared with management, with additional action taken where required. Staff described recognising signs of abuse and the process for escalating concerns. The provider made appropriate notifications to the Commission.

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 in place for managing risks. People had appropriate risk assessments in place which guided staff on how to mitigate future risks. Systems were in place to enable people, families and staff to update the provider on changing needs and emerging risks and likewise, staff were kept updated by the online system. Robust systems were in place to understand risks and respond to change.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Environmental risks within people’s homes were reported by staff to the registered manager and most were addressed quickly. It was not the provider’s responsibility to manage upkeep of people’s homes, however staff supported people to access assistance if risk was noted. Environmental risk assessments were conducted as part of the process for people accessing the service, to ensure safety for people and staff. Lone working policies were in place to support staff to undertake duties safely.

The provider made sure there were always enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received thorough support, supervision and development opportunities. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

Staffing levels were described as safe, with appropriate induction, shadowing, and ongoing training in place. Supervisions and appraisals were regular, and staff felt supported by leadership. Recruitment, training and development was a strength, as evidenced by robust documentation and consistent staff feedback.

Staff expressed satisfactionwith flexibility and team relationships. Staff consistently indicated they would recommend the service to friends or family, reflecting confidence in the quality of care provided.

Feedback about staff from people and families was overwhelmingly positive, supported by consistent themes of kindness, reliability, and communication.

Timekeeping and reliability were also highlighted as strengths, with no missed calls reported. One person stated, “time keeping very good and regular carers,” and another said, “no missed calls and they stay allocated time. I am very comfortable with them.”

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.

Infection prevention and control practices were well understood by staff, with consistent use of PPE and adequate supply available.

People and relatives confirmed staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriately and maintained high hygiene standards. Comments included, “carers use several pairs of gloves. They change them in between jobs” and “they [staff] always wear gloves and aprons.”

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. The provider had clear procedures in place, including the use of medication administration records (MARs), appropriate storage, and effective processes for administration and ordering of people’s medicines.

One person said, “they help me pop the tablets out of the blister pack and watch me take it,” while another confirmed, “no problem with the medication… it’s all documented and working fine.”