Up 24 Seven 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 – we rated this question as good. Safety was considered paramount by staff and the service leader. People were safe and protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm, neglect, abuse and discrimination. Their liberty was protected where this is in their best interests and in line with legislation.

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.

Staff and leaders evidenced how they managed, monitored and assured themselves that people were in the correct care pathway to meet people's individual needs. They ensured that relevant information was shared with partner agencies in a timely manner. Staff and leaders told us they referred people for additional support if this was required, for example due to people's changing needs.

We received positive feedback from the Local Authority about how the service works collaboratively with them and other agencies. The registered manager showed us several examples of communication with other healthcare professionals and how they work together to support people. For example, we saw examples of working in partnership with occupational therapist to support people to remain as independent as possible in performing daily tasks.

The service had policies and processes about safety which were aligned with other key partners who were involved in people’s care journey to enable shared learning and drive improvement. People had risk assessments in place to ensure staff knew how to support them safely.

People felt safely supported by staff. The relatives shared the same views. People's comments included, "I feel [my relative] is absolutely safe"; "I feel safe with the staff"; "my [relative] is safe, the service is very good, we have been using the service for around 3 years".

Leaders understood safeguarding process and the role of the different agencies involved. The registered manager evidenced good understanding of how to notify the CQC and the Local Authority about safeguarding concerns. Staff confirmed they received and understood safeguarding training. Staff told us they would be confident to escalate safeguarding concerns internally and to CQC.

There were clear and up to date safeguarding systems and processes in place that considered the protection of human rights and protecting people from abuse, neglect and discrimination.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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 felt safely supported by staff. People said that they are mostly looked after by staff that are familiar to then and this makes them more comfortable. People's feedback confirmed that staff attended their care calls on time and stay for the agreed duration of time. People praised staff's punctuality and felt they were adequately trained and "knew what they were doing".

Staff received training, regular supervision and opportunities to learn and improve their practise. Staff told us that the training made them feel confident when supporting people with their care. Managers carried out interview and relevant recruitment checks prior to staff working with people to ensure they had the correct qualifications, skills and experience to meet the needs of the people using the service. The registered manager evidenced a good understanding of how to request additional support for people from the Local Authority if there was a need for more hours than had been commissioned due to the changing needs of people. In addition, they showed they understood their responsibility to ensure the people were kept safe during the period while they were waiting for the council to carry out a reassessment of the person’s care needs.

The provider had robust and safe recruitment practices to make sure that all staff were suitably experienced, competent and able to carry out their role. Recruitment, disciplinary and capability processes were fair and were reviewed to ensure there is no disadvantage based on any specific protected equality characteristic. There was a system in place to ensure that staff attended people care calls on time. The provider had a training matrix to ensure that training is completed by all staff. There was policy and procedure in place to ensure that staff receive regular supervision, appraisal and support to develop.

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.

People felt safely supported with medication. We spoke with 6 people and no one expressed any concerns about the way that staff support them with the medication.

Staff told us they received medication training and felt confident in support people with medication. Staff told us that the information about medication and all the relevant information including people's preferences are included in people's care plans.

The provider had a medication policy in place that reflected current and relevant best practice and professional guidance. Medicines care plans and electronic medicines records were comprehensive and up to date. Medicines audits were carried out on a regular basis and were effective at identifying recording errors. People’s medicines were appropriately prescribed, supplied and administered in line with the relevant legislation and current national guidance.