Rolling Hearts Care 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 provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. The provider had clear procedures to manage safety events. Staff understood how to report, escalate, and respond to incidents, and managers applied Duty of Candour when things went wrong. Staff described a culture where safety concerns were listened to and acted on.

Records showed managers documented and reviewed incidents and accidents. Where issues occurred, managers recorded actions taken and made changes to care, such as updating risk assessments or care plans. Safety‑related complaints were minimal and addressed promptly, with families kept informed.

Managers focused investigations on learning rather than blame. Learning informed changes to practice and staff guidance, supporting safer care. However, learning was not always captured in one central log, which limited visibility of trends. This was feedback to management.

Managers shared safety learning through supervision, direct discussion, and team communication. Staff said managers supported them to reflect and improve practice.

The provider worked with people, relatives, and healthcare partners to establish safe systems of care. Relatives described the initial assessment as thorough and reassuring. A relative said the assessment was “courteous, professional, and interpersonal” and showed a genuine understanding of their family member and the family context, which helped build confidence from the start.

The provider had clear arrangements to manage referrals and transitions safely. Records showed managers gathered relevant information before accepting people into the service and involved partners where needed. A relative said the agency took time to ask detailed questions and ensure they understood risks and needs before care began, which helped ensure safe care delivery.

Pre‑assessment paperwork was completed before care started and shared with staff. Relatives confirmed they were involved in assessments and discussions about care. A relative said the care plan reflected their family member’s risks clearly, particularly around mobility, and staff listened to guidance from the family, supporting safe transitions into the service.

Managers communicated people’s needs effectively to staff. Records showed information was shared through care plans and handovers when people started care or returned from hospital. Relatives said this helped staff provide safe, consistent care without delay and gave reassurance that staff “knew exactly what to do” when changes occurred.

The provider worked with people 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.

The provider had clear safeguarding procedures aligned with current legislation. The registered manager set clear expectations staff must act immediately on any concerns, and staff said managers encouraged vigilance and early escalation. This helped prioritise people’s safety.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to recognise and escalate safeguarding concerns and told us they had not had to raise any safeguarding concerns. Relatives said staff responses reassured them and gave confidence the service would protect their family members.

The provider supported safeguarding through induction, training, and supervision. Staff said they felt safe to raise concerns and discuss poor practice, supporting consistent safeguarding in daily care.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Relatives said staff discussed risks during assessment and took time to observe before providing care. A relative said staff assessed mobility, daily routines, and environmental hazards first, which she found reassuring and “good practice.” Another relative said care workers discussed mobility and vision risks, followed agreed strategies, and listened to the family. They described staff acting quickly when concerns arose, which helped prevent harm while respecting choice.

Daily records showed staff followed agreed risk‑management plans. Relatives described care workers handling people carefully, using equipment correctly, and challenging unsafe practice. A relative said care workers had corrected unsafe positioning and recommended two care workers when supporting their relative to move which reduced the risk of injury to their family member.

Relatives felt confident staff would act if something did not feel right. They described carers as attentive, calm, and proactive in managing risks. This helped people receive care that felt safe while still respecting dignity and independence.

The provider identified and managed environmental risks in people’s homes to support safe care delivery. The registered manager described completing environmental risk assessments at the start of care and reviewing these when needs or circumstances changed. This helped ensure staff worked safely within people’s own surroundings.

Care plans recorded environmental risks clearly and set out control measures, including safe use of equipment and two‑carer support where needed. Managers said they adjusted care promptly when risks increased. Relatives confirmed staff worked safely within the home environment and followed agreed guidance, which reassured them.

The provider managed lone‑working risks through clear guidance. Staff said they understood when to withdraw from unsafe situations and contact the office for support. This helped protect both people receiving care and staff delivering it.

Staff remained alert to environmental hazards and escalated concerns promptly. Relatives said staff were careful and thoughtful in how they worked around the home. Ongoing review of risks supported safe, consistent care as people’s needs and home environments changed.

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.

The provider recruited staff safely and completed all required pre‑employment checks before deployment. These included Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for criminal records, references, right‑to‑work and health checks. The registered manager ensured staff did not work independently until they had completed induction and shadowing, helping to keep people safe and well supported.

Staff completed induction and mandatory training matched to their experience. Managers assessed competence through observation, supervision, and spot checks in people’s homes, supporting safe and consistent care.

Managers supported staff through regular supervision and oversight. Records showed discussions about wellbeing, performance, and training needs, and staff said they felt able to seek guidance when unsure. This helped people receive reliable care from staff who were supported, competent, and familiar with their needs.

The provider managed infection risks effectively to protect people and staff. Staff followed clear infection‑prevention procedures, including hand hygiene, use of personal protection equipment (PPE), and safe handling of equipment. Managers said this reduced the risk of infection in people’s homes and supported safe care delivery.

Staff said infection‑control practices were routine and well understood. They described training, spot checks, and audits as helping reinforce standards and enabling managers to address issues quickly. This supported consistent and safe practice across the service.

Relatives said staff practice reassured them. They described carers arriving prepared, using PPE appropriately, and explaining what they were doing. Relatives said this helped them feel confident that care was delivered safely and professionally.

Managers reviewed infection‑prevention practice regularly and updated guidance in line with national standards. This helped them to maintain safe care environments and protect people’s health and wellbeing.

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

The provider supported 1 person with medicines administration and managed this safely and lawfully. Care plans and medicines risk assessments clearly set out how staff supported medicines in line with the person’s needs and capacity. Medicine administration record (MAR) charts were completed accurately at the time of administration. This helped to ensure medicines were given correctly and on time.

The registered manager described proactively seeking written authorisation and clinical guidance from the person’s GP before supporting covert administration of medication. This included confirming best‑interest decisions, mental capacity considerations, safe methods of administration, and side effects staff should monitor. This ensured all legal and clinical requirements were met before care was delivered.

Records showed the registered manager proactively communicated with the person’s GP to request updated medicine reviews. This ensured the service had current clinical guidance, could update care plans accurately, and enabled staff to administer medicines safely and in line with the person’s changing needs.