Wellington Care Head Office

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

People received safe care. Care plans and risk assessments were in place and regularly reviewed. Medicines were managed safely. There were enough safely recruited staff who had the knowledge and skills to support people. Environments were safe, and infection control practice was well managed. There were processes in place to encourage a positive learning culture.

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.

People were supported by staff that were trained, knew their roles and learned lessons from experiences to ensure people received good care.

The registered manager told us they maintained a culture of safety in the service, where concerns were listened to, and incidents were reported and investigated. Lessons learned were shared with staff to prevent them from happening again. One member of staff told us, “We talk about it [incidents of safety and lessons learned] in team meetings. We discuss if any professionals need to be involved and agree any changes to improve safety.”

The provider has systems and processes in place for dealing with accidents and incidents. There were records of lessons learned from audits and details of the outcomes. The provider looked for any themes and took appropriate action to help prevent reoccurrences of incidents. Lessons learned were shared with staff at team meetings. The registered manager told us they were due to introduce governance meetings once a month to look at lessons learned and use these across the organisation.

People were supported through their care journey, for example if they transferred from hospitals into the community.

Staff and the leadership team were able to tell us how they initially assessed people that had been referred to the service. Information was obtained about people’s individual needs and risks to their safety. This information was used to ensure a smooth transition, and that people received safe and appropriate support as soon as they started using the service. The leadership team worked towards a joined-up approach to safety that involved people, their families and professionals, including social workers and doctors.

Partners had no specific feedback on this area.

Systems and processes had been established to assess and understand people’s needs to ensure their care was provided in a safe way. Records we reviewed demonstrated people's needs, risks and preferences were assessed and people were involved in the process where possible.

People confirmed they felt safe with the support they received. We asked one person if they felt safe with staff supporting them in their own home and they told us, “Yes.”

The registered manager demonstrated how the service protected people from abuse and avoidable harm. They told us that safeguarding incidents were recorded and reviewed using the providers governance systems to identify any learning which may help to prevent reoccurrence. Staff told us they had received training to support their understanding of how to protect people from any form of abuse and were aware of their responsibilities to report any concerns about people’s safety. One member of staff told us, “[Safeguarding] is about proportionality which is one of the values. I am confident when something raises a red flag - I would go to my manager with anything and ask am I overthinking it or do I need to take further. Externally I would go to CQC or contact [the] Local authority and make on online referral and I feel confident to do this.”

There were policies and procedures for safeguarding people and whistle-blowing in place. These provided guidance about the action to take if staff had concerns about the welfare of people. Training records showed staff had completed safeguarding training. The registered manager monitored safeguarding concerns through their governance processes. This enabled management oversight to take place ensuring the right action was taken and improved outcomes for people supported by the service. In addition, the leadership team held weekly risk management meetings which provided additional advice and support as well as providing professional oversight. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. When people receive care and treatment in their own homes an application must be made to the Court of Protection for them to authorise people to be deprived of their liberty. We found that where people were subject to restrictive practice a legal framework was in place to support them.

People were supported to understand and manage risks they may be exposed to.

Staff told us they were able to keep people as safe as possible and that the risk assessments in place were a good guide to help keep people safe, and that they had time to read and understand them. One staff member told us, “We talk to [Name] about risks, and I think they understand. We have regular conversations and explain the possible consequences.”

Care plans identified potential risks and provided guidance to staff to manage these risks. The risk assessments captured the hazard and how to mitigate the risk with detailed guidance for staff to follow to keep the person safe. Risk assessments addressed people's diverse needs. For example, people's specific needs around their mental health support were assessed. Environmental risks were identified for properties staff visited. All risks were reviewed and updated if people’s needs changed.

The service and staff had worked to support access to a bespoke living space for a person, adapted to promote their safety, privacy and independence.

The leadership team assessed any risks in people’s home environments and shared these with the staff team, so these risks were mitigated. Staff told us they had guidance and risk assessments to follow about working in people’s homes.

Records confirmed people using the service had the necessary risk assessments and guidance for staff in place. Staff were able to access support from team manager’s out of office hours. The registered manager was also available on call when needed, for example if there was an emergency.

People benefitted from a regular team of staff and a service that was organised and reliable which enabled them to receive care as planned.

Staff told us they received induction, and support from their team members and had regular supervision with their team manager. A staff member told us, “[Induction was] brilliant, one of the best inductions I have had. It was face to face and I got a full low down of the company and did good shadow shifts. You can ask for more if needed – [company is] always available to facilitate more support.”

The provider had safe recruitment practices in place to make sure that prospective employees were appropriately and safely recruited. The leadership team carried out various recruitment checks prior to staff working with people to determine they had the right level of skills, knowledge and qualifications to meet the needs of the people using the service. Police checks were also carried out to check for previous convictions and references and proof of eligibility to work in the UK were obtained.

People received support from staff to keep their homes clean. Infection prevention and control measures were in place to support this.

Staff confirmed they had access to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and they received training on infection control and the safe use of PPE.

Systems and processes were in place to control and prevent the spread of infection. Staff completed training in relation to the control of infection and they had access to sufficient PPE. The provider had an infection control policy in place that was up to date. Regular audits were completed to ensure compliance with infection control protocols.

People received support with their medicines to ensure they were administered safely and as prescribed.

Staff told us they received medicines training and felt confident supporting people with medicines. Staff completed medicine administration records after giving people their medicines. We saw the ones we reviewed were completed accurately. Spot checks were carried out to ensure staff followed correct and safe medicine procedures and continued to remain competent.

Policies and processes were in place that ensured safe administration of medicines. The provider carried out audits and reviews of medicines practices. Staff followed current national guidance and practice for safe administration and management of medicines.