Enablement Care Supported Living Services

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 culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Staff were encouraged to openly discuss and learn from one another. The compliance and quality assurance manager told us, “Sometimes depending on what happens, we would ask staff to do a reflective practice.” This reflective practice would give staff an opportunity to consider what improvements they could make.

A system was in place to report, record and monitor incidents and accidents to help support people safely. We looked at a sample of the most recent incidents/accident records. These detailed the nature of the incident/accident, immediate actions taken, the outcome and any follow up actions taken. However, there was a lack of documented information about lessons learnt to help reduce reoccurrence. We raised this with management who advised that they would ensure this information was recorded in future.

Staff told us they were able to raise concerns outside of the management team to help prevent the development of a closed culture.

The provider worked with people, relatives 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.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, were involved in their care and support planning.

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.

Relatives told us they were confident their family members were safe when being supported by care staff. A relative told us, “I am confident [my family member] is safe.” Another relative said, “[My family member] is safe with staff. Staff do understand [my family member’s] needs and care.”

Procedures were in place to help safeguard people from abuse and improper treatment.

Staff knew how to report concerns and said that they wouldn’t hesitate to do so. They were confident that management would take appropriate action without delay.

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.

Potential risks to people’s safety were assessed appropriately and risk assessments included detailed measures in place to help reduce risks. People’s risk assessments included details of relevant risks, triggers and control measures to help protect them. Risk assessments were comprehensive, and person centred.

Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPS) were in place for each person. These provided details about people's mobility and medical conditions that could impact on their ability to leave the premises in the event of an emergency and guidance on how staff should support them.

The provider identified and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They helped to ensure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The provider assessed people’s homes for risks and took action to ensure people, staff and visitors remained safe.

The provider used technology to help promote the safe delivery of care. For example, senior staff monitored electronic care planning systems. This helped to promote safety for both people and staff as the provider was assured care visits were completed as planned.

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.

We looked at a sample of staff rotas and found there were sufficient numbers of staff in place to cover care calls and meet people’s needs. The provider had an electronic homecare monitoring system in place to monitor care staff’s timekeeping and punctuality in real time. The system flagged up if care staff had not logged a call to indicate they had arrived at the person's home and were running late.

Policies and procedures were in place to help recruit staff safely. Checks on the suitability of potential staff were completed. This included obtaining references and checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). The DBS helps employers make safer recruitment decisions and help prevent unsuitable people from working in care services.

Records showed that staff had received training in areas relevant to their roles. Staff were given opportunities to discuss their performance and professional development with senior staff.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading. Care staff followed infection control processes, including washing their hands, keeping people’s home’s clean and wearing personal protective equipment (PPE).

Staff had completed training about infection prevention and control. Staff said they had enough PPE.

Infection prevention and control policies were in place. Staff were given the information and guidance they needed.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Medicines management systems were in place.

Electronic Medicine Administration Records (MARs) were completed by staff. We looked at a sample of these and found these were completed indicating medicines were administered as prescribed. Where medicines were not administered, there was a clear record of the reasons why and any action taken by staff.

Staff received training to administer medicines to help ensure they had the appropriate knowledge and skills.

Medicines in extra care settings should be stored in people's own flats in accordance with guidance. Medicines were stored in this way and people had a lockable cabinet in their flat where they stored their medicines.

Where people were prescribed medicines on a when required basis (PRN), there were appropriate protocols in place to advise staff on what circumstances and how to give these medicines.