Capital Homecare (UK) 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

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

The service was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Managers listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Safety incidents were recorded and investigated. The manager told us safety incidents were used as an opportunity for learning, and staff confirmed this. Staff meeting minutes showed learning was cascaded to staff to improve care for the individual and others. A staff member said, “ We use a WhatsApp group to distribute information about incidents as soon as they happen and then follow up with lessons learnt, and new ways of working, we also capture them in staff meetings.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Managers planned and organised care and support with people, together with partners and relatives in ways that ensured continuity. People’s care plans included information about the services and professionals involved in their care and support. Staff liaised with families and health professionals, where appropriate, to ensure people’s needs were safely supported.

The provider worked with people, their relatives, staff and other care professionals to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

The provider had a safeguarding tracker in place which made it simple to see if there were any trends emerging. Records showed that safeguarding concerns were appropriately escalated and investigated. We saw examples of actions being taken in response to safeguarding concerns to minimise future risk.

Staff had received safeguarding training and knew what their responsibilities were and how to report concerns. A member of staff said, “I initially deal with safeguarding concerns and then will pass on to [manager], who then reports to the local authority and CQC and does an internal investigation.” A relative told us, “[Relative] feels very safe with the carers.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Risks relating to people were assessed and managed appropriately. Risk assessments about care were person-centred, proportionate, and regularly reviewed with the person and their representative.

Staff knew the people they supported well and told us how they work with people to keep them safe. A staff member told us, “If [a person] has anxieties or challenges, I discuss this with them and we find the best way to support them, this is then updated in their plan.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Although staff were not responsible for the overall upkeep and safety of people’s homes, they ensured people were supported in keeping their environment safe.

Environmental risks in people’s own homes were identified and attempts to minimise those risks were in place. For example, the fire risk assessments in place for people detailed what things in the home staff should look out for and what they could do to reduce this risk. This included smoke alarms being fitted and tested regularly, checking escape routes were clear of clutter and any evidence of hoarding or excess combustible materials.

A staff member commented, “If there are issues with equipment or the gas or electricity, and if there’s something faulty in the home like a door handle being broken etc. I make sure I report it.”

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The provider followed safe recruitment processes to ensure they employed the right people for the role. There was a consistent staff team working with people wherever possible. Relatives described staff as “effective” and “well trained.”

Staff were happy with the training they received. A staff member told us, “The training I received for the job was good. In my induction I had about 4 months of it, including online ones, I’ve had refreshers. I also shadowed some other carers.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Staff were trained and understood their role and responsibility for maintaining high standards of cleanliness and hygiene in people’s homes, as well as their own personal and hand hygiene.Staff were able to access a policy which was in line with best practice guidance. People confirmed staff took precautions to reduce the risk of infection during personal care and said staff disposed of the waste appropriately afterwards.

Staff had access to a consistent stock of personal protective equipment (PPE). A staff member told us, “I make sure to use PPE and change it and wash my hands. It keeps us both safe. When I go there, I get myself ready. I put on gloves, I give a strip wash, I change my gloves, I assist them with their clothes, I assist with toileting, I change the gloves again.”

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

The provider had policies in place to manage the safe administration of medicines. People’s medication administration record (MAR) charts were completed appropriately and audited and reviewed by the medicines officer.

Staff received medicines training and felt confident they could support people with medicines. Information about people's medicines was included in people’s care plans. Staff competency checks were carried out for staff who supported people with medicines.