Kare Plus Romford

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

People were protected from the risk of abuse and harm. Risk assessments were in place to ensure people received safe care. Systems were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely and were suitable to support vulnerable people. Staff attended calls on time to ensure people received care in a timely manner.

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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were protected from abuse and felt safe. People and relatives told us they received safe care from staff. A person told us they received, "Excellent care and support." Another person commented, "Exceptionally good care." A relative told us, "She [person] is very happy with the service they provide her."

Staff had been trained in safeguarding and were aware on how to safeguard people from harm. Staff told us they always asked for peoples consent prior to supporting them.

There were processes in place to safeguard people from abuse and harm. A safeguarding policy was in place that detailed the types of abuse and how to escalate concerns if staff suspected or see abuse to ensure people were protected. A whistleblowing policy was in place and this gave guidance to staff on how they could raise concerns about any unsafe practice. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and understood how to protect people from harm and who to report to when required. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty had the appropriate legal authority and were being met. Systems were in place to obtain consent from people to provide care and support. Consent forms had been completed to ensure people consented to receive care and support from the service. Staff had been trained on the MCA. The registered manager and staff were aware of the principles of the MCA. Staff told us that they would always request people’s consent before doing any tasks. People were able to make day to day decisions about their lives. For example, they were able to chose how they wanted to be supported. Where people did not have capacity to consent to care and treatment, then MCA assessments had been carried out and best interest decision process was followed.

People and relatives told us that staff looked after people well, which included minimising risks to ensure people were safe. A person told us, "Yes, always exceptionally good staff."

Staff were positive about the service and told us they were well supported in their roles. Staff told us that they were listened too and action was taken when feedback was provided to management about the service. Staff also told us there was a open door policy and that management was approachable. Staff told us they were able to go to appointments on time. A staff member told us, "There is enough staff to cover clients."

Risk assessments were in place to ensure people received safe care and support. Risk assessment included risks associated with peoples health needs such as epilepsy and measures to ensure people were safe. Risk assessments had also been completed on other areas such as on falls and skin integrity.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People and relatives had no concerns about staff that supported them and with timekeeping. A person commented, "Yes, no concerns and they are always on time." A relative told us, " Yes, there is always plenty of care staff. They are very good and stay their allocated time."

Staff were positive about the service and told us they were well supported in their roles. Staff told us that they were listened too and action was taken when feedback was provided to management about the service. Staff also told us there was a open door policy and that management was approachable. Staff told us that the service was well-led and they enjoyed working for the service. A staff member told us, "The manager is supportive." Another staff member commented, "The training is exceptionally good, and the support is really good, and the communication is amazing. I worked for a year." Staff told us they were able to go to care calls on time.

Staff had completed training and refresher courses in key areas such as on infection control, medicines and basic life support to undertake their roles effectively. There was a training matrix, which provided oversight on staff completion of training and when training was next due. New staff members had received a induction about the importance of the role. Supervisions and appraisal had been carried out regularly to ensure staff were supported. Feedback was sought from people about staff prior to appraisal, which was discussed with staff. The service had low staff turnover and some staff had been working at the service for a long time, this ensured there was continuity of care when supporting people. Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Checks included obtaining proof of staff identity and the right to work in the UK. References had been requested and completed to ensure staff were of good character. Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) checks had been made to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable adults and children. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff told us the recruitment process was very detailed. Staff attended calls on time and the service used a digital call monitoring system to have oversight of time keeping.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.