Annicare North

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. The provider was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safeguarding people from abuse, and safe recruitment of staff and safe care and treatment. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (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.

Staff had received training in how to record incidents. All staff told us they would contact the office immediately to let them know about any incidents, as well as completing an incident form. We saw following incidents people’s care needs were reviewed to ensure emerging risks were taken into account in the care provided.

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 provider worked with other health care organisations to support people to move between services. They worked with one NHS service to support people in hospital and to work with them to transition to discharge and live in their local community. In addition, they worked with the local hospital to support people at the end of their lives. This included accepting people on short notice so they could be discharged from hospital and be supported to be comfortable in their own home at a difficult time of their lives.

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.

People told us they felt safe when using the service, a person said, “I’m very safe, we get on well I let them in, and they say ‘Hello’.” Another person told us, “Yes, I’m safe, they come in and announce themselves I know them. I would speak to [office staff] if any problems.”

Staff had received training in how to keep people safe and how to recognise signs of abuse. The provider had a safeguarding policy in place so staff had support and guidance available whenever needed. The provider worked collaboratively with the local safeguarding authority to investigate concerns and to agree changes to people’s care if needed.

Where community Deprivation of Liberty orders were in place, the provider ensured they supported the person in line with any conditions that had been put in place by the court of protection.

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.

Staff had received training in how to record incidents. All staff told us they would contact the office immediately to let them know about any incidents, as well as completing an incident form. We saw following incidents people’s care needs were reviewed to ensure emerging risks were taken into account in the care provided.

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.

Staff had received training in how to record incidents. All staff told us they would contact the office immediately to let them know about any incidents, as well as completing an incident form. We saw following incidents people’s care needs were reviewed to ensure emerging risks were taken into account in the care provided.

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.

People told us staff had the skills to care for them properly. A relative told us, “[Name] felt they were safe as the staff were so competent.” A person told us, “Staff are well trained, and they know me.” Another person told us, “Yes, they know what they are doing and can`t do enough for you.”

The provider had a system in place to support staff development and practical skills. This consisted of unannounced spot checks on staff while they were providing care, supervisions and appraisals. Any concerns identified were discussed and staff supported to improve their skills and knowledge.

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.

People were confident staff worked effectively to prevent the risk of infection. One person told us, “They wear tops, gloves and wash their hands.” Another person said staff were, “Very clean and tidy and wear gloves.” Staff had received training in managing the risks of cross infection. They were aware of how to use protective equipment and how to dispose of it to keep people safe.

The provider did not always make sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff did not always involve people in planning.

Staff had received training in how to safely support people with their medicines. People confirmed they were happy with the care provided around their medicines, a person told us, “I have 4 lots of medication, and the carers do it and never miss.”

Records showed call times were not always supportive of people receiving their medicines safely. There was not always enough time between calls to ensure an appropriate gap was left between doses. At the time of the inspection there was no one who required regular medication every 4 hours. Following the inspection the provider wrote to us to tell us they made calls that involve medications time critical to ensure correct duration between doses.

Where people required medicines to be administered as required, there were clear protocols in place to support the safe administration of medicines. However, 1 person had received a second dose of an as required medicine too early. The provider was unaware of this and agreed to investigate why it had happened to see if any changes or further training was needed.