BeTo Solutions 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

People were safeguarded from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and systems were in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Potential risks to people’s health and well-being were identified. The provider ensured there were enough staff to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Staff recruitment processes were robust. People were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care.

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.

Throughout our visit we saw staff as well as the manager interacted with people who used the service in a kind and courteous way. People were relaxed in the presence of staff and had built up good relationships with them.

The service had policies and procedures in place for safeguarding adults. These advised staff on what to do if they had concerns about the welfare of any of the people, they were providing care and support to. Staff were also aware of the whistleblowing procedures. A whistle blower is a person who exposes any kind of information or activity that is deemed illegal, unethical, or not correct within an organisation. 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. 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. The registered manager had a good understanding of the principles of the MCA. Staff had received training in this area and were familiar with the processes and principles of the MCA. There were policies and procedures for them to follow. Care records of people contained information about their capacity and what support they required. We saw staff asked people for their consent before providing them with care and support. People were able to make day to day decisions about their lives. For example, they were able to choose what they ate and drank. Staff monitored people's mental capacity to ensure that they were able to make appropriate decisions and where needed, supported them to do so.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities to report any safeguarding concerns and were able to tell us the actions they would take if they witnessed or suspected any abuse. A member of staff told us, “I will inform my manager if I have any concerns, if they are not available, I would call the police, local authority or CQC.” Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to escalate any concerns that they might have to external agencies. The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities on how to protect people from abuse.

People were safeguarded from abuse or harm and staff understood how to keep them safe and report any concerns they had. A person said, “It’s very good here, I like living here. Staff are very helpful and nice.” A relative told us, “I could not be more please, it’s like a home from home, like a seconded family. I know my [family member] is very safe living here.” People and their relatives were happy with the service and did not raise any concerns on the way staff provided care and support. People said they felt safe, and staff were supportive and helpful.

Care and support were planned and delivered in a way that ensured people’s safety and welfare. Risk assessments had been carried out to identify any risks to people, when providing care and support and to ensure they were supported to remain as safe as possible. Risk assessments gave staff clear information on how best to support people in different situations, for example, where people were at risk of fall. This helped to ensure care and support was delivered in a safe way. Staff knew about people’s health needs and ensured they were safe when carrying out any task. The provider also had an environmental risk assessment to identify any potential risks and how to minimise them. This helped to ensure care and support was delivered in a safe environment. Records confirmed that checks on the premises and equipment were carried out to ensure health and safety of people, staff and visitors to the service.

People had risk assessments which explained possible risks and the actions staff needed to take to reduce them. We found the risk assessments gave staff clear guidance on how best to support people in different situations. People and their relatives were involved in the delivery of care and support being offered which included the management of potential risks. A relative told us, “I am very much involved in the care of my family member.”

Staff knew about people’s health needs and ensured they were safe when carrying out any tasks. They told us the risk assessments informed them on what action they should take to reduce risks and to keep people safe. The registered manager encouraged staff to report any new risks so that appropriate action could be taken to ensure the safety of people who used the service. The management team were in regular contact with people and their relatives, and this helped to identify any risk or changes in the needs of people using the service. The registered manager had good links with a number of health and social care professionals, and this helped to ensure people’s needs were fully met.

Throughout our visit we saw staff as well as the manager interacted with people who used the service in a kind and courteous way. People were relaxed in the presence of staff and had built up good relationships with them.

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

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to provide personalised care and support. Staff told us there were enough staff working in the service. The provider employed sufficient staff so that they did not have to use agency staff. Staff told us they had benefitted from training as this was useful in helping them to meet people’s needs. From records we saw staff had regular training updates and were supported to undertake further training if they wished. Staff told us they felt supported, and the registered manager was approachable. They said they could speak to the registered manager at any time. Staff felt there was a good atmosphere and an open culture in the service.

There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet the needs of people. The service provided enough staff to ensure people were given safe care. We found people were supported by the same group of staff, so they were familiar to them. This helped with consistency and continuity of care as staff were aware of the needs of people they were caring for. People were protected by appropriate recruitment processes. The provider ensured appropriate checks had been carried out before staff were employed and started work. This helped to ensure people were protected from the risk of receiving care from unsuitable staff. We noted checks such as criminal records, proof of identity and requests for references had been carried out before staff started work. We noted people were supported by staff who had received appropriate training. The provider had a programme of training for staff to undertake whilst working at the service. Training records showed staff had completed training in a number of areas to help them meet the needs of people. This included safeguarding, mental health awareness, infection control, food hygiene, learning disability awareness and care planning. There was a training plan in place, which detailed the training staff had undertaken and what they required over the following year. New staff received an induction, which covered their familiarisation with the service, people who used the service and the provider’s policies and procedures. They also undertook some training during this period as well as shadowed more experienced staff until they were confident to work on their own. Staff were given appropriate supervision and support which helped to ensure they were able to provide effective care. Staff told us they were well supported by the management team and there were opportunities for them to further develop their skills and knowledge.

People told us that they were happy with the care and support they received and said there were enough staff working at the service. A person said, “I can ask staff for support if I need any help.” A relative told us, “I am happy with the way the staff look after my family member.” People received care from staff who had the knowledge and skills needed to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. People also told us that they had known the staff for long time, and they felt they could talk to staff about any concerns.

Throughout our visit we saw staff as well as the manager interacted with people who used the service in a kind and courteous way. People were relaxed in the presence of staff and had built up good relationships with them.

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.