Prolife Healthcare Services

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

Staff were recruited safely and had the appropriate pre-employment checks in place before employment commenced. People were supported by staff who had received relevant and good quality training. The majority of staff told us the rotas were well organised and they had time to spend with people. The people we spoke with confirmed this. Staff were inducted and trained to carry out their roles and the majority were positive about the support they received. People were kept safe from avoidable harm and staff understood how to protect them from abuse. Staff had been trained and understood safeguarding and whistleblowing. They reported they were confident to follow procedures if required. Staff also demonstrated a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act. People told the Experts by Experience they felt safe. People did not report any concerns about how risks in their care were managed. People gave signed consent to their care plans.

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 Experts by Experience spoke with 3 people and 7 family members about safety. They told us the service was safe. They also confirmed staff asked for consent before providing care and support.

Staff were supported through their induction and training to understand their safeguarding responsibilities. We discussed safeguarding training with 12 staff and checked their learning in practice. All staff had received training and understood what the different types of abuse were and understood when to report concerns. All staff were confident managers would respond appropriately. Staff also received Mental Capacity Act training. They understood it and knew how to escalate concerns if someone refused care.

The safeguarding and whistleblowing policies included how to raise concerns with local authorities and the Care Quality Commission. The training matrix provided a record of staff attendance at safeguarding training and also training on the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards.

People and their families were positive about how risk was managed. We received no concerns about the unsafe management of risk.

We spoke with 11 staff about how risks were managed with people’s care. We received no concerns. Staff told us the care plans were accurate and up to date.

People had consented to their care. People and staff had access to electronic care plans which provided live alerts to the office staff. This helped to ensure tasks were completed. The care people received was reviewed with people after 3 weeks to ensure the care was being provided correctly; this was reviewed again after 6 months.

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

People told us they felt safe. The feedback we received was mostly positive, regarding punctuality, regular staff and staff training. Language was cited as a barrier with international staff in a quarter of responses.

The registered manager told us staff recruited from overseas received an enhanced induction to help bridge the gap resulting from differences in food, culture and language. We spoke with 13 staff about safe and effective staffing. Staff told us they were happy with the training and induction provided and some staff had been encouraged to do additional qualifications. Staff told us they had regular supervision and spot checks were in place to assess the care they provided in practice.

Staff were recruited safely. All required pre-employment checks were completed before an applicant started work, including seeking references from previous employers and ensuring the correct documentation was in place for any overseas workers. For overseas staff, this included a police clearance document from their country of origin and a formal English language test. UK disclosure and barring service (DBS) checks were also completed to ensure staff were of suitable character to work with vulnerable adults, Expiry dates for visas and overseas driving licences were recorded for all staff recruited, so the provider knew when they expired. All staff completed an induction and training courses when they started working at the location. Software was in place to ensure refresher training was up to date. We checked the records of 5 staff and could see they received regular 1-1 supervision and regular spot checks.

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.