Lotus Community Care Service

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

We assessed 8 quality statements from this key question. We found that people were protected from harm. Staff were recruited safely. The service had an open culture and made sure they learned lessons from mistakes or when things went wrong. People told us they felt safe living at the service. Health and safety were well managed and monitored.

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.

Relatives told us they were able to raise concerns or issues with the team and work together to resolve them.

Staff told us they had regular meetings and discuss any incidents and issues. A staff member said, “We have good meetings we learn from each other every day we are listened to and can give our ideas.”

The local authority was very positive about the service.

Staff recorded all incidents and investigated complaints. Evidence provided by the service showed all incidents were analysed and learning was recorded. Staff held de-briefing sessions to discuss concerns and seek guidance. Audits of incidents were done regularly. Actions and outcomes were discussed with staff during team meetings. Care plans were updated following these incidents.

People had input from a range of health care professions which meant they had support to meet their needs.

Staff told us that they supported people regularly to attend external appointments and regular referrals were made to ensure people’s health care needs were met.

Healthcare professionals involved at the service told us that the team were very proactive and followed up on any appointments needed for people.

The provider had a clear process to ensure people’s care and support needs were met when moving between services. Regular referrals were made to health care professionals in a timely manner. This meant people could be confident that their care needs would be met seamlessly when moving from one service to another.

Relatives told us that the service was safe in all aspects.

Staff and leaders were able to explain clearly the process for reporting abuse. All staff we spoke with told us they had regular meetings with managers and could seek guidance about any concerns during these meetings.

On the day of our visit, we observed appropriate interactions between staff and people. There were no concerns observed during our visit over 2 days.

The provider had an effective system to ensure safeguarding concerns were identified and investigated. Staff received training in safeguarding and how to recognise signs of abuse. This meant people could be confident that staff had the skills needed to protect them from harm or abuse.

Relatives told us they were asked for their input in risk and care planning. A relative told us they felt staff needed more training to support people when they became distressed.

Staff were able to describe people’s care needs, and the strategies needed to offer a person re-assurance.

We observed interactions between staff and people, we noted how staff used appropriate language and followed the positive behaviour plans which were in place for some people. This resulted in people being supported in a way which met their needs.

The provider had a clear system to support people to manage risks. Care plans outlined how to mitigate risks of harm to people. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs. People were involved in their care plans and risk plans.

Relatives told us the service was a safe place for people to live.

Staff told us there were daily checks on the environment and any concerns were dealt with in a timely manner.

The service was clean and tidy. Bedrooms were personalised. The environment was homely and nice.

The provider had a clear and effective system in place to ensure the home environment was safe and equipped to meet people’s needs. Environmental risk assessment ensured staff had clear guidance on how to manage everyday hazards. Accidents or incidents were recorded and investigated to determine the cause and put additional measures in place to mitigate further occurrence.

Relatives told us there was enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people living at the home. A relative told us they felt staff needed additional training to support people with complex communication needs.

Staff told us they had training to do their jobs effectively. They also had individual meetings with managers when needed. This helped them to seek support and guidance when required.

Whilst in the service we noted that people did not have to wait for care or support. This was because there was enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs when required.

The provider had a clear system to ensure staff had the required level of training and induction to carry out their roles effectively. Background checks were carried out prior to staff taking up their employment. This meant people could be confident that staff had been vetted and supervised during the beginning of their employment.

Relatives told us the service was clean, and staff wore gloves when providing care to people.

Staff told us they had a regular cleaning schedule. Daily cleaning duties were on the handover file.

The service was very clean and tidy. Staff were observed using personal protective equipment [PPE] when providing care such as gloves.

Audits of infection, prevention and control measures were developed and carried out regularly. Policies and procedures were in place which meant staff could seek guidance when needed. Staff received training in preventing the spread of infections, Overall, the provider had good oversight on health and safety. People could be confident that they would be protected from the spread of infections.

Peoples’ medicines were available and in stock. People received their medicines as prescribed. Peoples’ medicines were reviewed regularly.

Staff were able to explain the procedure for administering people’s medicines. This was in line with company policy and procedures for medicines.

Medicines were stored correctly. Administration records were completed accurately.

There was a medicines policy in place that clearly outlined staffs’ responsibilities. The service conducted audits to ensure staff were handling and administering medicines in line with the company’s policy. Staff received medicines training and were assessed to ensure they were competent to handle and administer medicines. People received their medicines on time.