Vivid Care Services 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. This is the first inspection for this service. This key question has been rated 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 service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. All incidents were recorded. Professionals working with Vivid were able to access these via the service’s electronic system. All incidents were discussed in the regular MDT meetings and changes made to people’s support to reduce the risk of further occurrences. A professional said, “Incidents have reduced in intensity and severity hugely since [Name] moved (to Vivid supported living home).”

The service 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. Detailed transition plans were agreed by the MDT and Vivid to ensure people’s anxieties and distress were supported during any change in people’s support, for example when moving to a new supported living home. The service worked closely with positive behaviour specialists to implement and review strategies to reduce people’s distress.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They 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 service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. People, their representatives and professionals were involved in all aspects of people’s care. Any concerns were discussed in the weekly or fortnightly MDT meetings. Incidents were now shared through an electronic system where possible, or immediately sent to professionals, rather than waiting for the next meeting.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Professionals provided clear care plans and positive behaviour support plans to meet people’s complex needs. Feedback was positive about staff following these plans and their reporting of any changes in people’s needs so the plans could be reviewed. People were supported to safely take part in new community activities of their choice. We discussed with the registered manager how Vivid would need to review and write more of their own person-centred risk assessments if the MDT meetings reduced in frequency.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Regular health and safety checks were completed. Any maintenance issues were completed in a timely way. The environment was adapted where needed, for example glass had been replaced with Perspex to reduce potential risks.

The service 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. Each person had a regular staff team, so the staff were able to understand the person’s needs and communication methods. The person was also able to become comfortable with their staff team. A professional said, “The staff genuinely care about [Name]. Staff received training specifically around each person’s needs. A professional said, “All training is based around [Name’s] needs and how to respond to them.” Staff had been safely recruited.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Cleaning schedules were in place for staff to follow.

The service did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They did not always involve people in planning. People received their medicines as prescribed. There had been an issue when the service had started to support one person, with some medicines initially being missed. This was identified through the MDT and resolved. We discussed with the registered manager about the lessons learnt and how this situation could be avoided in the future. We discussed with the registered manager to ensure any ‘as required’ medicine guidelines, for example for pain relief, clearly identified how the person would communicate they needed the medicine to be administered. Where people needed to have their medicines administered covertly, for example in food, this had been appropriately agreed and authorised.