CAP Caring HQ

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. Concerns about safety were listened to and the registered managers investigated and reported safety events. Incident reports were analysed to identify trends and themes. Managers shared lessons learnt with staff to improve safety and minimise the risk of future incidents.

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 provider shared information and updates with other health professionals when required to support people’s needs. There were examples of how staff had identified health conditions and ensured this information prompted appropriate referrals.

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. The provider worked with people and those important to them to understand what being safe meant to them and how to best support people to stay safe whilst maintaining their independence. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to report any concerns. The providers had worked closely with the local authority safeguarding team and kept detailed records to ensure peoples’ safety.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. People told us they felt safe when being supported. Risks were assessed and monitored. Risk assessment guidelines were available for staff to follow to ensure they provided safe care which met people’s needs. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. One relative said, “Staff are very much about enabling [person’s name] to remain in their community, and staff have gone out of their way to maintain their high quality of life.” This person had been able to access events in their community with support.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment supported the delivery of safe care. Environmental risk assessments were completed for each person to identify and manage any potential hazards.

The provider made sure there were enough experienced and skilled staff available to provide people’s support. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. People told us they usually had a consistent team of care staff visiting and they spoke positively about their regular care staff. The provider had a robust recruitment policy and ensured staff were safe to work with vulnerable people. Training was comprehensive and tailored to peoples’ needs.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. The service had an infection prevention and control policy for staff to follow and relevant training and resources were in place to support staff to follow good hygiene practices.

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’s care plans detailed what support they required to manage their medicines safely. Staff had received medicines training and had their competency checked prior to administering. The registered managers completed regular medicines audits to identify any shortfalls in practice.