Allfor Care Alpha Care Recruitment West and Home Care Service 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 provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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.

There were systems in place to identify learning from incidents, accidents and complaints. Relatives told us they knew how to raise any complaints, and 1 relative told us they had raised a complaint, and the provider had taken immediate action to resolve the issue.

When an incident or accident occurred care workers completed a record with information on what had happened to enable a senior staff member to investigate. The information was reviewed and actions to reduce future risks were identified. People’s care plans were updated to reflect the learning from the investigation.

The incidents, accidents and complaints records were monitored every 3 months to identify any wider trends which required action.

The provider had a process to ensure there was a smooth transition for people when they started receiving care in their own home. People’s support needs were identified during an assessment before the care started and from reviewing the information provided by the local authority.

The provider had a process for reporting and investigating safeguarding concerns relating to the care provided. When a concern was identified it was discussed with the local authority and an investigation was completed with actions identified to reduce risks. People receiving support and relatives said they felt care was provided in a safe manner.

Risks had not always been identified and risk management plans developed. The care plans for some people indicated that care workers supported them to attend appointments and take part in activities in the community, but risk management plans had not been developed. Some risks assessment related to medical conditions but did not provide information on the impact to the person. A risk assessment for epilepsy provided descriptions of different types of seizures but there was limited information on the type of seizure experienced by the person and the impact it had on their day-to-day life. Care workers confirmed they had completed training on epilepsy. The lack of guidance for staff meant that people were placed at risk of inappropriate care and treatment. Risk assessments had been carried out for other aspects of a person’s life in relation to their health and wellbeing.

The provider carried out environmental assessments on possible risks in relation to providing care in people’s homes. Fire risk assessments had been completed to identify any possible risks including if the person smoked. Some people had a personal emergency evacuation plan developed to provide care workers with guidance on how to support the person to a safe area if an emergency occurred.

The provider had enough care workers to provide the support required, they completed training, but some relatives did not feel this was sufficient to meet complex care needs and had regular supervision and annual appraisals.

Relatives of people with complex care needs felt care workers who visited them did not always have the appropriate training to meet the person’s support needs. A relative explained that their regular care worker understood their family member’s complex needs, but some care workers did not have the same skills so the relative had to step in and provide care. Other relatives told us they felt they needed to train new care workers to ensure they understood how to provide the support in a safe manner. Care workers told us they completed a range of training courses which included those of specific support needs such as autism and epilepsy which was confirmed by the provider’s training records.

Care workers supported some people to receive their nutrition through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). The care workers required specific training in relation to providing nutrition support using a PEG to reduce possible risks, but the provider was unable to demonstrate that all the care workers visiting people with this care need had completed the specific training.

Care workers confirmed they had enough travel time between visits, the allocated time for the visit enabled them to complete all the care tasks and if they were running late, they would inform the person and office.

The provider had an effective recruitment process which included obtaining 2 references, proof of identify and their right to work in the UK and a criminal record check. New care workers completed an induction and shadowed experience care workers before providing care on their own.

The provider had procedures in place to manage infection control. Care workers confirmed they had access to personal protective equipment (PPE) which they used during visits. Their comments included, “I use gloves, aprons, masks and sanitiser for my clients, and they is a stock of PPE, if running low I would inform the office” and “Office provides gloves, masks, aprons, and sanitisers PPE is provided in advance by office.” People confirmed staff usually wore PPE during their visits. Training records showed care workers completed infection prevention and control training with annual refresher sessions, and this was confirmed by care workers.

People’s medicines were administered in a safe manner and as prescribed but the provider’s medicines recording system did not always support care workers to record when they administered medicines.

The provider used an electronic MAR chart system which included information on the prescribed medicine, the dosage and when it should be administered. The deputy manager confirmed that an issue had occurred with the electronic MAR in July 2024 which meant it did not always allow care workers to record the medicine administration. A senior staff member explained they had told care workers to transfer the medicines information to paper MAR so they could complete them if the electronic system was not accessible.

The registered manager confirmed they were in regular contact with the company that provided the electronic MAR and they were working towards resolving the issue with the system.

The records of care completed by care workers indicated that they administered over the counter and traditional remedies, but this had not been identified in the monthly audits of the records of care or in the medicine records.

Care workers had completed training on the administration of medicines and their competency was assessed. The provider had developed guidance for care workers on when they administer medicines which had been prescribed to be administered as and when required.