Immaculate Care Limited

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

There had been improvements to safe care and treatment. Risks to people's safety were appropriately managed and people received their medicines in a safe way. However, we identified further improvements were needed to some records to help make sure staff had all the information they needed to keep people safe. There were systems to investigate and respond to accidents, incidents, and complaints. There were enough suitably trained staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People using the service and their relatives knew who to speak with if they had concerns. They told us these had been dealt with well. Their comments included, ''My first call would be to the manager. But I have no complaints'' and ''The manager is understanding if I need to speak with them.''

The registered manager explained they called urgent meetings with staff to discuss when things went wrong and when improvements were needed.

The provider had procedures for investigating and responding to complaints, incidents, and accidents. They discussed any learning with staff. They had adjusted people's care plans when needed.

People using the service had been supported when they returned home following hospital admissions.

The registered manager told us they carried out assessments in hospital and met with people, their families and other healthcare professionals to discuss their needs.

We did not receive direct feedback from partners but saw evidence of good communication between the agency and partners to enable smooth transitions between services.

The provider had processes to ensure they communicated with other stakeholder when supporting people to transition between services.

People using the service and their relatives felt safe. They told us staff respected them and they knew who to speak with if they had concerns about safety. One person commented, ''It is safe. The carers are responsive to my requests.''

Staff told us they had undertaken training to understand about safeguarding people from abuse.

There were procedures for safeguarding people. The provider liaised with others, including the local authority, to discuss concerns and make sure these were investigated.

People told us they felt risks were well managed. They explained staff knew how to use equipment and did this well. One person told us, ''They are safe with the hoist, and they know what they are doing.''

The registered manager explained they involved people using the service and their families in risk assessments, asking for their views, and checking they had accurately recorded these.

The risks to people's safety and wellbeing had been assessed and planned for. There was limited written information in some of the risk assessments. This meant these assessments and plans were not always personalised. We discussed this with the management team and they agreed to make the necessary changes. However, staff knew people well and there was enough information to help keep people safe. Risk assessments and plans were regularly reviewed.

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 told us they were cared for by the same familiar staff who they knew and liked. They told us care workers arrived on time. Their comments included, ''I have never had a problem with timings'' and ''They are pretty much always on time.''

The staff explained how they were recruited and about the training they had undertaken. They said the training had been useful. One staff member explained, ''It has helped my awareness.'' The staff told us they had enough time to carry out their jobs and to travel between care visits.

There were procedures to help ensure only suitable staff were recruited. These included checks on the staff. New staff shadowed experienced workers and completed training for their roles. Managers assessed their knowledge, skills, and competencies. Staff undertook regular training updates and met with managers to discuss their work.

People told us the staff followed good hygiene practices. Their comments included, ''The carers level of hygiene is good'' and ''Their hygiene is excellent.''

Staff told us they had enough personal protective equipment (PPE) and had undertaken training about infection prevention and control.

There were systems to help ensure staff had access to PPE and for them to report any concerns about infection.

People using the service and their relatives told us they were happy with the support they received with medicines. Their comments included, ''Medicines are quite well organised'' and ''There is no problem with medicines.''

The registered manager told us they liaised with people using the service, their families, prescribing doctors, and pharmacies regarding people's medicines needs.

There was information about people's prescribed medicines. However, this was not always detailed enough. For example, there was not enough information for staff to understand about what medicines were for and the potential adverse side effects. We discussed this with the management team so they could improve records to help provide staff with the necessary information. The staff were trained to administer medicines in a safe way. Managers assessed their competencies and knowledge regarding this. Staff kept records to show when they had administered people's medicines, and these records were checked to make sure medicines were administered as prescribed.