Lovage Homecare 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed 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.

Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider told us how they used information to improve the service, this included when incidents occurred. They explained when there had been a discrepancy with medicines, the action they had taken and the actions they put in place to try to prevent this from happening again in the future. They told us they discussed this with staff, so they were aware of the situation and the action that had been taken. This demonstrated the provider had processes in place to ensure they could learn from safety events.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored.

There were processes in place to ensure people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. The provider told us they reviewed information that was referred to them and told us they completed face to face assessments with people to ensure they could meet their needs. People’s pre assessments were available for us to review. Staff told us they were aware of people’s assessed needs and used this information to ensure they delivered care to people in line with this.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People felt safe being supported by staff and raised no concerns about their safety.

There were systems in place to ensure safeguarding concerns were considered. Staff had received training and were able to tell us the action they would take if they were concerned about a person. One staff member said, “I could report to the office or the local council.”

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 relatives were happy with how risks were managed. One relative told us, “Carers use hospital bed dynamic mattress and once used a hoist and a sling. Carers move my relation to prevent pressure sores.”

There was a system in place to ensure people had care plans and risk assessments that were reflective of their current needs. The staff team worked with people and their families to ensure care plans and risk assessments were developed individually for people. Care plans considered people’s mobility needs, eating and drinking requirements and skin monitoring. These were reviewed regularly or when changes had occurred.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment.

There were processes in place to ensure environmental risks in people’s homes and surrounding areas had been considered. People had individual risk assessments in place that related to their environments.

The provider had systems in place to ensure there were enough staff available to support people.

People were generally happy with their call times; all people we spoke with told us care was delivered at the correct times and staff stayed for the allocated amount of time. Records we viewed confirmed this. A person said, “The staff are mostly on time.” One relative said, “Are generally on time but there have been a couple of instances where they arrived early for his visit. I have spoken to them about this.”

Staff had received mandatory training that gave them the skills to safely support people. Staff had also received specific training that was individual to the support people received, including catheter care.

Staff had received the relevant pre-employment checks before they could start working with people to ensure they were safe to do so.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection.

People and relatives raised no concerns with infection control and all people told us staff wore Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). One relative said, “The staff wear aprons and gloves.” Staff confirmed they had enough PPE available, and they had received training in this area. A staff member confirmed to us the importance of wearing PPE and said, “It helps stop spreading germs and infections.” There were processes in place to ensure staff protected people from the risk of cross infection.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

People were happy with how they received their medicines. One person said, “There is a locked box with my medications in they get them out and I take it.”

People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff administering medicines had received training and their competency was checked by the provider when they completed spot checks. This was to ensure they were safe to administer these to people. We found that medicines administration records did not always contain enough information including the dosage, however the provider took action during our inspection to ensure this information was added.