Positive OT & Case Management 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

This key question has been rated good. We assessed 3 quality statements in the safe key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. People were safe and good processes were in place to assess and manage risks. Staff were recruited safely and they had the support and training to be able to carry out their role safely.

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 and relatives told us they felt safe. Comments included, "I have absolutely no qualms at all that [name of service user] is safe in the community. I know they will handle anything that crops up" and "I feel safe when staff are here."

Staff told us they had received training in safeguarding. They understood how to recognise and respond to any concerns about poor care or abuse. Staff told us people were cared for safely. Comments included, "Yes,100%, [name of person] is 100% well cared for."

Processes were in place to protect people from abuse and poor care. The provider had an up to date policy and maintained a clear safeguarding log and actions taken to safeguard people. Staff had received up to date safeguarding training.

Relatives told us risks were managed safely and they felt involved in their relatives' care and support. Where people had complex needs risk assessments were in place and staff understood how to follow them to keep people safe. Comments included, "Everything is taken straight on board and put in the care plan.”

Staff demonstrated they had a good understanding of the risks people were exposed to. They had access to detailed risk assessments to support them to carry out their role safely. Staff said they received clear information. One staff member told us about an example where a person had complex epilepsy and descriptions of the different seizures and associated risks were clearly documented which meant they fully understood how to respond.

The provider had safe processes in place to manage risks. There were detailed risk assessments in place which were regularly reviewed. Where people had complex needs specialist advice was sought as part of the risk assessment process. Accidents and incidents were recorded, and appropriate action taken to mitigate the risk of events happening again.

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 told us staff were recruited and managed safely. Relatives were involved in recruitment processes to ensure staff were compatible with their relatives. People were supported by bespoke and consistent staff and had the skills and training to be able to support and care for people safely. Comments included, "The quality of their work is excellent. They know [name of person] inside out. They do what I need them to do." Where people had complex needs, relatives were sometimes involved in training alongside the staff team. Another person described staff as "brilliant”.

People's care packages were designed around individuals so staff worked exclusively with them. Staff spoke positively about the induction, training and support they received. Comments included, "The training is really, really good. Very thorough." All staff received a good level of mandatory training which included key elements of the support worker role but staff also fedback about high quality training specifically in relation to the person they were supporting. This included bespoke moving and handling and epilepsy training which was designed completely around an individual's needs. Staff told us they received regular supportive supervision.

Processes were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely and all the required checks were completed. The provider worked very closely with people and relatives to ensure staff were compatible with the people they were employed to support. This included using creative adverts and face to face meetings with people and their families as a starting point. Staff job descriptions were written around the needs of individuals. People received bespoke packages of care from individuals or teams which meant they were supported by consistent staff who knew them very well. Processes were in place to ensure staff received good induction, training and supervision. This included individualized training from a range of professionals depending on people's needs.

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.