Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 provider had nurtured a good learning culture. Robust systems were in place to report, review and analyse key safety areas, including accidents and incidents. Leaders were proactive in overseeing safety events, reviewing the severity, contributory factors, trends and steps to reduce risk. All staff told us the provider had a ‘no blame culture’ and there was a positive learning environment.

Events were consistently viewed as an opportunity to put things right, to learn and improve. This ensured staff consistently reported all concerns. Any learning was shared across the staff team to ensure constant, safe practice. We saw evidence on how this was embedded in staff practice.

Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Learning was then shared with staff to improve safety. One staff member told us, “When incidents occur, we discuss them. They [leaders] go an extra mile to ensure they are all safe and their needs are met in the comfort of their homes.”

Staff were clear in their responsibility to report and record safety events. This included when people showed signs of emotional distress, agitation or if they were told of historic events, records were fully completed to show what action staff had taken, including how this had been reported, any healthcare involvement or medications and their effectiveness.

People and relatives, we spoke with all were satisfied with how any safety events were handled and responded to.
 

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.

From the moment people first contacted the service, robust arrangements were in place so that care was discussed and planned with the involvement of people, their relatives and professionals. We viewed records which demonstrated the providers consistent approach ensured people had excellent continuity of care. Feedback shared the positive experiences right from the beginning. A courtesy call was made to review how the first care visit went. A member of staff told us, “We don’t go to a new client’s home without meeting them first, we always shadow someone. If it doesn’t ‘fit’ they are happy to consider other staff who may be more suited”.

The provider prioritised safety and continuity of care throughout people’s care journeys. For example, when people had been admitted into hospital, the provider collaborated effectively with various clinical teams to ensure people had effective continuity of care. This had a significant positive impact on the support people received. It ensured they had safe and appropriate care which met their needs and preferences to an extremely high standard.

Staff and leaders knew people exceptionally well and recognised when their health and wellbeing needs changed. They were highly responsive in seeking advice and support from healthcare professionals which reduced hospital admissions for people.

Professionals spoke highly of the provider. Comments included, “They communicate effectively, particularly when issues arise or when they identify areas where practice could be improved. They are proactive in engaging wider health and social care partners.” And, “They are responsive, they will agree to an MDT (multi-disciplinary team – made up of different health and social care providers) last minute if needed, they are very thorough.”
 

The provider worked well with people and healthcare partners to understand what feeling safe meant to them and how best to achieve this. Staff were focused on improving people’s wellbeing while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. Concerns were shared promptly and appropriately with the relevant agencies.

The provider had clear safeguarding systems that supported staff to recognise and respond to potential risks of abuse or harm. Staff worked closely with individuals to understand their wishes and what helped them feel safe. People and relatives told us they felt safe with staff in their homes, and feedback reflected confidence, reassurance and trust in the care they received.

Safeguarding processes were embedded into day‑to‑day practice, and incidents were investigated in line with policy. Actions were taken in a timely manner, and learning from events was shared to support safe practice across the team. This helped ensure safeguarding remained a consistent priority and that risks were understood and managed appropriately. One example showed how concerns were acted on promptly. When a person became distressed due to individuals approaching their property at night, the provider contacted partner agencies, supported the person to access additional home security measures and made a safeguarding referral to the local authority.

Overall, the provider had effective safeguarding arrangements that protected people from the risk of harm. Staff understood their responsibilities, acted quickly when concerns arose and worked with other professionals to help keep people safe.
 

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.

Care plans had personalised guidance for staff on how best to support people to minimise risks to their safety and emotional distress. People consistently told us that staff knew them exceptionally well. They were regularly involved in reviews of their care and had confidence in staff’s skills to support them safely.

Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe and told us how they involved people in their care. Staff received clear, up to date information about people’s risks and any safeguarding needs.

The provider had adapted their initial risk assessment to fully address all areas of needs and structured monthly visits, for those more vulnerable, ensured staff had accurate, timely information to support safe decision making. The hands-on approach from the management meant teams received regular updates on people’s needs and they had clear guidance, ensuring staff felt informed, equipped and able to deliver safe care consistently.
 

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

People were supported to keep their environment safe. The provider took appropriate steps to identify, assess and manage risks within and around people’s homes. Care plans contained environmental and fire risk assessments. They included vital information such as where to shut off gas, electric or water in the event of an emergency.

The provider demonstrated a proactive approach to environmental safety. When concerns were identified, such as unknown individuals approaching a person’s property at night, the provider had acted immediately. This swift response helped reduce the person’s anxiety and strengthened their sense of safety being at home. Leaders used learning from this incident to improve safety monitoring and expanded their environmental assessments to ensure risks were fully understood, particularly for people who lived alone or had limited local support networks. This approach has improved early intervention, including where appropriate the use of technologies to support people’s safety and led to positive outcomes when working with partner agencies.
 

The provider made sure there were enough suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received regular support, supervision and access to development opportunities, which helped them work confidently and consistently as a team to deliver safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The provider used an electronic scheduling system to plan and monitor care visits. This enabled real time oversight of when staff arrived and left people’s homes and supported effective rota management. Regular and familiar staff attended calls wherever possible and mapping tools were utilised to ensure realistic travel times, helping ensure calls were not rushed and care was delivered safely.

Staff completed a comprehensive induction, which included knowledge checks, direct observations and competency assessments. New staff also completed a trial period before working independently. This helped ensure they were prepared for their roles and understood the provider’s expectations around safe practice.

Training was delivered face to face, covering key areas relevant to people’s needs. Staff told us this approach supported their learning and helped them feel confident in applying the skills they had developed. Competency assessments were refreshed when needed to ensure staff continued to work safely.

Each new staff member was supported by a mentor, who provided guidance and helped them settle into their role. Staff said this helped build their confidence and promoted good teamwork.
The registered manager told us, “As a company we really do take pride in looking after the staff and clients ensuring runs are efficient and practical for all of us.” Staff confirmed. “We always get updates on what's going on or happening, so we're always kept in the loop.”
 

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 effective systems in place to assess, monitor, and manage the risk of infection. Staff were proactive in identifying potential infection risks and took timely action to prevent the spread of infection. Any concerns were shared promptly with the appropriate external agencies to ensure coordinated responses.

People told us that staff were respectful of their homes and surroundings and consistently supported them to maintain clean and hygienic environments. Staff received annual infection prevention and control (IPC) training, alongside individual discussions to identify and address any gaps in knowledge or skills.

Leaders carried out regular spot checks to ensure staff demonstrated consistently safe and compliant IPC practices. Staff had access to appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and were also provided with company uniforms to support good hygiene standards.
 

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 and their relatives told us that medicines were managed safely and effectively. Feedback included, “EDS Homecare were extremely thorough in recommending how to store and help us manage the medication,” and “They provided just the right support for my medications.” Staff echoed this, with one member of the team saying, “Medicines— all sorted. They get ordered, and staff collect them if required.”

Staff had received appropriate medicines management training, and leaders completed regular competency assessments to ensure staff were suitably skilled and confident in their roles. Medicine records were personalised, clearly detailing how each person wished to be supported, any known allergies, and any requirements for medicines to be administered in a specific format.

There were effective systems to ensure that any changes to people’s prescribed medicines were communicated, documented, and implemented without delay. Staff worked closely with healthcare professionals to maintain safe and accurate medicines support. The provider used nationally recognised resources to benchmark policies and practice against sector guidance. The leadership team reviewed all policies annually as standard, and more frequently if incidents or updated regulatory information required earlier review.

Following a medicines incident, the provider introduced a new policy around controlled medicines, demonstrating a commitment to reflective practice and continuous improvement.