TrustBridge Care

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

We identified some improvements were needed with the management of medicines that were prescribed to be given at specific times; the provider made these improvements during our assessment. We observed sometimes staff worked long shifts. We discussed this with the registered manager who told us they would introduce further checks to ensure staff worked safely.

There were enough staff employed and recruitment checks were completed to help the provider employ staff suitable for the role. Staff completed training relevant to their role. Infection prevention and control measures were followed. There was a culture of ‘learning to improve’ evident in the service. People felt issues were resolved and any accidents and incidents were reported and reviewed to help prevent the same situation happening again. People felt they received safe care and systems were in place to ensure people’s care safely transitioned between settings, for example, if a person spent a time in hospital. People’s views were included in their care plans and people were supported to be involved in managing any risks identified associated with their care needs and their home environment.

People were involved in assessments that informed their care plans and risk assessments. Staff had access to people’s care plans and associated records on mobile electronic devices. People’s consent was obtained in line with the Mental Capacity act (MCA).

People had mixed views on whether they had been asked for their opinions on their care.

People were involved in their care planning to help them receive person-centred care and access services they needed. People felt they were treated equally and had access to other healthcare professionals when needed to help ensure their care was appropriate to meet their needs. People were given information in a way they could understand and were provided with information on how to make a complaint should they need to. Procedures were in place to support the provision of end-of-life care when needed.

Whilst processes were in place to check on the quality and safety of services, we found some of these were not fully effective. We discussed these areas with leaders who took action to make the required improvements as part of our assessment. Most, but not all people found leaders achieved improvements.

Leaders communicated well with their staff teams on any updates relevant to them. Staff told us their leaders were supportive and they felt valued for the work they did. Staff felt the principles of equality, diversity and inclusion were supported by leaders. Leaders received training specific to their jobs roles to help develop them as competent leaders. Staff told us they felt able to raise any concerns directly with leaders as well as with outside organisations such as CQC and the local authority. The service worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals who told us they found leaders approachable.