Haven Care- Streatham Also known as Haven Care

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

People we spoke with told us they felt the service was safe. People and relatives, confirmed they were able to raise concerns with staff and felt staff listened to them, and took action as required. One person told us, “They do what they are supposed” and a family member told us, “They are professional and reliable with good customer service. My [relative] is vulnerable, they don’t take advantage”.

Safeguarding incidents and accidents were recorded and reviewed by the management team.

We looked at several incidents and found that the provider had completed reviews and ensured any required actions were undertaken and to identify any themes or trends so that the service could continually improve and develop positive outcomes for people. Learning and improvement information was shared with staff in both staff and supervisions meetings.

A member of staff told us, “The manager keeps us up to date with any changes and we have regular communication through various different channels, and regular meetings.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners such as social services, GPs, district nurses, 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.

Staff told us they read through the care plans to ensure they had all the information they needed to provide support safely. A relative told us, “We had the initial assessment completed with the care coordinator before we started the package. I have no complaints with the way the package was put together and the plan put in place. We have also had a review since then.”

Staff told us, “Prior to accepting the care/support package an assessment meeting was undertaken to determine if we are able to support the individual or not.“ A comprehensive assessment of needs and safety is carried out; we speak with their health professionals involved such as social services, nurses etc and often ask for further information and clarification”.

The registered manager told us, “We ensure. each person receives the best and the right support as part our assessment we consider staff skills, knowledge, training and additional training needed.”

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 with the local authority and CQC.

People we spoke with felt safe with staff during their visits and when delivering personal care. One person told us, “They [Staff] are very able to look after me, I feel safe when they are in my home.” Another person told us, “I feel safe with the staff, I am quite happy, I have not had any concerns with any of the staff who have come.”

The registered manager had raised safeguarding concerns appropriately and had worked with the local authority to investigate these to ensure people were being safeguarded.  Staff had received safeguarding training, and they knew and understood how to recognise the signs of abuse and report on any concerns to help keep people safe.

A staff member told us, “I would report to my manager, and send out email or phone and record it on the person notes on the app.” One staff member told us, “If I had concerns, I would call the office or speak to my manager to raise the concern and record it.”

The management team reviewed safeguarding incidents and ensured the required action was taken.

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.

People and their relatives were involved in the creation of their care plans and risk assessments. People told us they were also involved in the review of these.

Some people lived with health conditions including, diabetes, high blood pressure, and mental health conditions. The staff we spoke with had an understanding of people’s needs and how to support people safely.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in people’s own homes They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The staff told us they completed checks such as health and safety, fire risk assessment in people’s homes to ensure the environment was safe and reported any concerns they may have. Prior to care being delivered, the registered manager (or the management team) visited people’s homes and completed environmental risk assessments. This ensured staff were able to deliver care to people in a safe environment.

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 and relatives confirmed care visits were regularly carried out by the same staff member, so there was continuity of care. They also confirmed that the staff usually arrived at the agreed time and they would stay for the full visit time. People were also notified if staff were running late.

People’s Initial assessments determined the level of support people required in their homes and the rotas showed there were sufficient numbers of staff scheduled to work in accordance with people’s needs

Staffing levels were guided by a regularly reviewed Electronic Call Monitoring and audits these reflected people's needs the staff and skills needed to meet people's care and support needs in their individual homes. Based on our sampling of rotas and related data, we found the service was safely supported people in their individual homes.

The manager told us they allocated care workers based on the person’s support needs. They monitored the times recorded on the records of care completed by the staff.

The staff confirmed they had enough travel time between visits and sufficient time during each visit to complete the support the person require

The provider undertook appropriate pre- employment checks, such as criminal record checks, right to work in the UK and references from positions of care with previous employment to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. New staff undertook a comprehensive induction programme which including training and shadowing.

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.

The provider had a process in relation to managing infection prevention and control. Staff confirmed they had completed training for infection prevention and control.

Staff collected PPE from the head office. Staff told us they had access to enough personal protective equipment (PPE) including shoe covering, gloves and aprons, to keep people safe when providing care. People and their relatives told us staff used PPE, when they were had been supported with personal care activities.

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.

People’s medicines were administered as prescribed. The staff completed medicine administration record (MAR) when they supported a person with their medicines. Medicine records were audited reviewed monthly to ensure they had been completed in line with best practice and if there were any gaps in recording of medicines administration, staff had recorded the reason. We found some risk assessments did not consider or give guidance on the safe storage of people's medicines. We brought this to the attention of the registered manager and he agreed to review this as part of our feedback.

Staff told us they had completed training on the administration of medicines, and they felt confident when supporting people in their homes. The provider carried out competency assessments for the administration of medicines to assess the staffs’ knowledge.

A staff member told us that, “I check the MAR sheet and medicine in the blister pack to make sure it is right medicines. We are told by the coordinator if a new or change in medicine and I read instructions to understand.”