Harrogate Home Support

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 improvements have been made, and the rating has improved to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.The service promoted a positive learning culture where safety was prioritised. Staff were confident in raising concerns, and people felt safe and supported. Families and individuals said issues were addressed quickly and openly. Staff reflected on incidents and feedback to improve care. People were encouraged to ask questions and be involved in their care, contributing to a culture of openness and continuous learning.

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.The service had effective systems in place to support safe care delivery. Care pathways were well-managed, and transitions into and out of the service, for example, when accessing hospital and GP services were supported with up-to-date care records and coordinated to reduce known risks. Staff understood their responsibilities and followed clear processes to ensure people received consistent and safe support.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners 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 service had robust safeguarding procedures in place, and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities to identify and escalate any concerns. People and families consistently reported feeling safe. A relative said, “I feel very happy that [person] is safe. They [staff] are very caring and go above and beyond to check she is happy.” Staff training was up to date and relevant, with regular supervisions including observations of competency supporting good practice.

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. The service promoted a strong learning culture that supported safe care for people with autism and learning disabilities. Staff felt confident to report concerns, and incidents were handled openly with learning shared across the team. People were actively involved in managing risks, with support plans reflecting their communication needs, preferences, and routines. A relative said, “The carers are well trained. [Relative] has a core team. They understand him and how to support him meaning they can keep him safe.” This person-centred approach helped reduce anxiety and supported safer, more consistent care.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.Required improvements following the previous inspection ensured staff had access to detailed risk assessments to support safe access and navigation of people’s home environments. Care plans recorded specific sensory and communication needs of people with autism and staff worked proactively to reduce environmental triggers, supporting people to feel secure and in control.

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. There were enough suitably skilled staff on duty to meet people’s individual care and support needs. Staff had the right skills and knowledge and were deployed in a way that supported consistency and reduced anxiety. Rotas were well-managed, and people received care from familiar staff who understood their communication styles and routines, contributing to safe and person-centred support.

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 had received training and used Personal Protective Equipment appropriately. Routine checks ensured staff followed safe hygiene practices, while ensuring this did not cause distress or disrupt people’s routines. People were supported to understand infection risks in ways that suited their communication needs, helping them feel safe and involved in maintaining a clean and healthy environment. One person said, “I clean my own spaces, keep the kitchen tidy and clean.”

People received support to take their medicines safely as prescribed with staff trained to support people with autism and sensory needs in ways that reduced distress and promoted understanding. People were involved in decisions about their medication where possible, and regular reviews ensured safe and person-centred practice. The registered manager told us, “Staff are trained to identify and respond to physical health needs through a combination of health-related knowledge for each person, observational tools, and person-centred approaches which is especially important for individuals whohave limited verbal communication or a high pain threshold. We maintain regular contact with health professionals, including GPs, community nurses, and LD teams, to report concerns and seek guidance. We use behavioural cues and known individual responses to assess pain, especially for non-verbal service users.” Staff discussed the use of adapted communication tools, such as Easy Read, and Makaton to support expression of discomfort. PRN (as and when needed) medication protocols were used as point of reference for staff on how to identify when someone may be in pain or discomfort when considering the use of pain relief medication. This ensured pain relief was administered appropriately and consistently, based on observed need rather than assumption.