Faye Hammond Consultancy 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.

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 service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider had a clear process for recording and reporting accidents and incidents. Staff recorded events in detail. The provider reviewed events to ensure risks for people were reduced. Staff were informed about events and any changes that were required to prevent a recurrence. Staff told us they felt able to report any concerns and were supported by management. The registered manager had a comprehensive understanding of people’s needs and maintained effective oversight of the care delivered.

The service 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.

People’s needs were assessed prior to people receiving a service, and a guide was in place to provide additional support for the transition. The provider shared information with external professionals if required, for example, when they went to hospital.

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

Relatives told us they felt people were safe with the support they received from staff. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to identify and report potential safeguarding concerns. Staff were confident the registered manager would follow up on any concerns and take appropriate action. The provider had systems in place to ensure safeguarding concerns were reported quickly and appropriately.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Staff knew people well and told us they had enough information about people to support them in line with their needs. Risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed and recorded. These were regularly reviewed and updated. Staff and relatives told us they could approach management when changes occurred.

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

Environmental risks were assessed prior to people receiving support, and these were regularly reviewed. Staff had received training in how to use equipment safely. Staff and relatives told us training was provided when different equipment was introduced.

The service 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 were supported by a stable staff team who had the skills and knowledge to provide effective support. Relatives were complimentary about staff and felt staff were appropriately trained. The provider had an induction process in place. Staff received regular training, supervision and competency checks. The registered manager told us relatives were able to be part of the recruitment selection process. Overall, staff were recruited in line with regulatory requirements. However, we identified some gaps in the records. These were addressed by the provider during the inspection.

The service 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 protected from the risk of avoidable infections. Staff had received infection prevention and control training. There was a process in place to ensure staff had access to personal protective equipment (PPE), and staff use of PPE was monitored during checks of their practice. Relatives told us staff kept people’s homes clean.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People received their medicines as prescribed. Relatives confirmed this. Staff received medicine training and checks were in place to assess their practice. Where medicines were prescribed to be taken ‘when required’ there were protocols in place to guide staff when these might be needed. Administration of medicines was recorded on an electronic system, which provided a live and accurate record of administration. The provider had a system in place to regularly audit medicine support provided.