Jeremys Carebuddies Limited

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 safeguarded from abuse and risk of harm. Staff and the provider had a good understanding of abuse and how to report it. People and relatives were involved in care planning and risk management. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing identified were mitigated as much as possible. Staff were recruited to the service using safe recruitment practices. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

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.

The provider had a clear safeguarding process in place. Safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures were in place. Staff had access to guidance about safeguarding and how to report abuse. Staff received training in safeguarding which meant they had knowledge and confidence in dealing with any safeguarding concerns. Service records reviewed showed incidents were reported to the authorities in line with best practice.

Relatives told us they had no concerns about their family members’ safety with the care staff or agency. The provider shared the results of a recent survey they carried out with people using the service. When asked about feeling safe and protected from harm all respondents said they felt safe with staff and the agency. There were no concerns or complaints raised with the agency about safety.

Staff and leaders told us they understood how to protect people from abuse. Staff had a good understanding of abuse including the signs and symptoms. Staff said they would report any concerns to the managers. Staff were able to explain that if the managers did not deal with issues, they would then use the whistleblowing procedure and go the CQC or local authority.

People and their relatives were involved in the care planning process. This also included managing risks. Staff were able to explain hazards and risks to people’s health and how to mitigate them as much as possible. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible, which meant managing risks or hazards, for example 1 person was encouraged to do some exercises at home, staff told us they supported the person to do this activity safely.

People’s care plan contained information on risks of harm for example if a person had a risk of falls this was recorded in their care plan. Staff would then be aware of this and would support the person in a way which was safe. Incidents were recorded and discussed in team meetings. This meant people could be assured that their safety was priority.

The provider had a process in place for managing risks to people’s health and wellbeing, this included providing staff with training on concerns for example pressure sores. Policies and procedures were in place to support staff if they had concerns about people’s wellbeing. Staff were aware of different risks and understood what control measures were in place to mitigate risks as much as possible. Some risk management plans lacked details to guide staff. Following our feedback the registered manager told us they will review these plans and add additional information for staff to use if needed.

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

The provider had a process in place for recruiting staff safely. This meant people could be assured that staff had been fully vetted before starting in their role. Staff had a full and comprehensive induction. Staff also had training in a variety of areas which enabled them to build competence and confidence in their role. Staff records showed staff training was regularly reviewed and updated. There was enough staff to meet people’s needs.

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.