Crown Senior Care

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 At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. People were safely cared for and supported. The provider assessed and planned for risks. Medicines were managed in a safe way. There were enough suitable staff deployed to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. There were procedures to help safeguard people from abuse and these were followed. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We did not identify concerns relating to these areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

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.

There were systems to help safeguard people from abuse. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of safeguarding practices and procedures. A staff member explained, "Safeguarding is about protecting vulnerable adults from abuse, neglect, and ensuring their human rights are upheld. If I have concerns, I report and record them with the management team and ensure they are addressed before I leave for the day." Another noted, "It’s my responsibility to spot signs of harm, abuse, or neglect, and to protect clients' health and well-being. Concerns are logged, reported to management, and discussed in confidence, ensuring appropriate action is taken." Safeguarding was a standing topic on the team meeting agenda, where staff discussed relevant legislation and reviewed procedures for identifying and reporting abuse.

Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing had been assessed and planned for. Relatives consistently highlighted the thorough and inclusive approach to risk assessment. A relative told us, "The manager visited [person’s] home, looked around, and advised on changes for [their] safety.’’ The registered manager visited each individual’s home before initiating their care package. During these visits, they collaborated with the person and their relatives to assess potential risks and develop a plan to mitigate these. Key areas of risk considered included mobility and the home environment. Hazards were clearly identified within people’s care plan, with risks thoroughly evaluated and appropriate measures implemented to reduce them. Staff monitored risks relating to people’s nutrition and hydration and reported any concerns. Individuals receiving support and/or their relatives were fully involved in risk assessments. These assessments were tailored to meet each person’s unique requirements and preferences.

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 suitable staff to provide safe and effective care. People we spoke with expressed high levels of satisfaction with the service, noting that carers consistently arrived on time and stayed for the required duration as outlined in care plans. The service operated with a small team of 5 staff members who received thorough inductions and training. The team was appropriately sized for the number of individuals supported, ensuring personalised and effective care. Staff took the time to understand each person’s needs and address concerns promptly in line with the service’s procedures. Staff were provided with a comprehensive handbook that included all key policies and procedures. Updates were communicated clearly and staff had to sign and confirm that they read and understood the handbook. They were equipped with the necessary information and training to perform their roles effectively. The registered manager maintained close communication with the team through regular calls and spot checks, ensuring consistent quality and support. There were appropriate systems for recruiting staff to make sure they were suitable. These included checks on their identity, eligibility to work in the United Kingdom, competencies, skills and knowledge.

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.

People received their medicines safely and as prescribed. All staff at the service were trained in medicines administration. The registered manager conducted medicines competency checks quarterly, ensuring staff maintained high standards. Additionally, the registered manager undertook regular audits of medicines administration and storage of medicines to uphold best practices. Staff responded promptly to changes in people’s medicines needs, ensuring their safety and well-being. Staff responded appropriately to medicines incidents, working with other healthcare professionals when they identified concerns so that people remained safe and had the right support with their medicines.