Lotus Home Care Calderdale

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 – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff investigated and reported safety events appropriately. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Processes in place evidenced an oversight of incidents, accidents and complaints. The registered manager could evidence how lessons were learnt and shared with staff. Feedback collected from staff was used to continually make improvements and embed good practice. Staff told us they were confident to raise concerns, and felt the management would take action as required. All feedback was shared with staff, positive or negative.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. The registered manager worked with people and their relatives to develop an assessment of the person’s needs prior to a care package commencing. The provider worked with external professionals to ensure seamless transitions into care. An external partner told us the provider was, “Responsive and up front in sharing information.”

The provider worked with people to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. Staff were up to date with safeguarding training and could demonstrate they understood how to raise safeguarding concerns. Although we found the provider raised safeguarding’s appropriately, external professionals told us there was occasional delays in responding to requests for information.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Risk assessments were person centred, and the registered manager had implemented systems to ensure that risk assessments were updated with people’s involvement.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Environmental risk assessments were in place and personalised. This included access to their property, cluttered environment and smoking risks. Staff were able to provide examples of how they provided care whilst ensuring the environment was safe.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Processes in place ensured staff had been recruited with a range of checks including references and disclosure and barring checks (DBS). Staff had been trained appropriately and were up to date with training. Staff received regular supervisions and appraisals and there were opportunities to develop in their role. Overall feedback from people and their relatives was positive, comments included, “[Staff] generally arrive on time” and “[staff] come on time.” However, we received some comments regarding difficulties amending call times. One relative told us, "We previously had some issues at the weekends, we have agreed to change the time of the visit which has been imperfectly honoured. They are changing the call times, we will see."

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of infections spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. People had an infection prevention and control (IPC) risk assessment in place which was person centred and up to date. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of IPC procedures. Staff said they received appropriate training and received regular spot checks. Staff told us they followed IPC processes to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. People received support with their medicines from a trained and competent staff team. A staff member told us, “I have no concerns. I’m trained and the medication care plan is very clear, it’s always up to date.” The management team completed regular checks to ensure people received their medicines on time and in a safe way. They took action if they identified any issues or discrepancies for example, providing additional medicine training for staff if needed.