Brainerd Limited Domiciliary 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

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. People were supported to understand and manage risk. Care plans were clear and provided detailed guidance to staff to keep people safe. There were suitable numbers of trained staff who knew the person well.

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.

People were protected from harm or abuse. A relative told us that the person felt safe with staff and they could tell this from their body language and facial expressions. The relative knew who to report to with any concerns and had no concerns about staff knowledge in this area.

The provider had a safeguarding policy and procedure in place to prevent abuse and respond quickly should it occur. Staff had all received safeguarding training, which was regularly reviewed. The registered manager checked staff understanding when they completed this training. There were details of who to contact outside of the organisation regarding any concerns, in the office. This included contacts for the Local Authority Safeguarding Team and CQC.

Staff were able to recognise signs of abuse and knew who to contact with any concerns. The registered manager demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding; although no incidents had occurred, they were able to explain how they would manage any safeguarding concerns if they arose.

A relative told us that the person was able to do what they wanted and staff supported them to manage risks. The relative said that staff were not averse to risk and understood potential risks to the person as part of their care and support.

The person had a series of detailed risk assessments that were personalised to them. We were read a risk assessment regarding supporting with anxiety and this was very detailed in how the person presented and how staff should support. Risk assessments were regularly reviewed to ensure they currently reflected the person's needs.

Staff told us that they asked the person what they wanted to do and then made it happen. They told us about some areas of risk such as epilepsy or managing anxiety and how they supported the person with this. The registered manager also knew risks well and had a proactive approach to managing risk.

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 was a recruitment policy and procedure to ensure all staff were employed safely. This included DBS checks and references from previous jobs. The registered manager sought feedback regarding staffing regularly. They managed rotas closely, ensuring the person always had the right amount of staff to support them. This was flexible depending on what the person wanted to do or any appointments they might have. It was clear that the staff worked together to enable the person to live the life they wanted. Staff had all received regular training, some specific to the person's support needs.

A relative told us that the person had had the same staff team for a long period of time and that some had known them over 10 years. This meant that staff knew the person very well and this had an extremely positive impact on them. The relative said, there had never been any issues with staffing. If the person needed extra support, it was given automatically by the same, dedicated staff team.

Staff told us they always had the right support when it was needed. They knew when the person required 2-1 or 1-1 staffing and advised this was always given. The registered manager was also very knowledgeable of staffing levels that were needed, as they too knew the person's support needs well. The registered manager was enthusiastic about learning and was constantly seeking new training for staff to increase their 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.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.