HAB Support 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 registered on 23 March 2023. 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. Whilst there had been no previous accidents or incidents, the provider was able to describe the processes in place. They understood the importance of notifying the appropriate organisations when required.

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. Whilst the provider worked closely with other services and could provide numerous examples of multi-disciplinary working, none of the people in receipt of a regulated activity required this support at the time of our assessment. Initial assessments were carried out prior to people receiving a service and this information was incorporated into their care and support plans.

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. Even though the provider had not raised any safeguarding concerns, the registered manager and staff were able to explain the safeguarding process and knew how to recognise and respond to signs of abuse. One staff member said, “I would report any concerns to the management team. We can contact them any time.” Staff confirmed and records showed staff had received safeguarding training.

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. Risk assessments were in place. These included any risks associated with the person or environmental risks. For example, any risks related to the persons mental health and emotional well-being, use of mobility aids and internal risks such as the location of utilities. Risk assessments stated whether the supported person was aware of the location of utilities in their home however, they did not state the actual location of these. We shared this with the management team who told us they would add this into people’s care records, so staff were aware.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Risk assessments considered environmental risks. We discussed with the management team, where appropriate, documenting the location of utilities (gas, electric, water) in people's care records to ensure staff can respond immediately and effectively in the event of an emergency.

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 had systems in place to monitor call times. However, the management team were open and honest and told us this needed further development and oversight. People we spoke with did not raise any concerns in relation to calls. One person said, “Sometimes they (staff) miss times and add it on, and I go out, which I don’t mind, it doesn’t happen very often. If staff are running late, they let me know via text message.” A relative told us, “We have no issue. If staff are late or there is a change of staff, they phone me.” Staff received the relevant training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively and safely. This included training in areas such as first aid, health and safety, moving and handling, mental health, learning disability, communication and the care certificate. The care certificate is an agreed set of standards that defines the knowledge, skills and behaviours expected of specific job roles in the health and social care sectors. It is made up of the 15 minimum standards that should form part of a robust induction programme. People felt staff were well trained and had the skills and knowledge they needed to support them. A relative said, “I feel staff are well trained and know what they are doing. They’re consistent in what they do with [person’s name] it runs smoothly and brilliantly.” We looked at the provider’s interview process and discussed how the management team intended on developing these further to include more specific questions in relation to the role. Systems were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely. This included checking their identity, obtaining at least 2 references and Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks. The DBS checks helps employers make safer recruitment decisions and prevent unsuitable people from working with vulnerable people. We did identify 1 staff members file did not contain their full employment history prior to 2022. The management team assured us they would gather the relevant information for the staff member’s file.

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. Staff received training in infection prevention and control (IPC) and personal protective equipment (PPE) was readily available for staff. A relative said, “They (staff) are brilliant at that. They (staff) wear gloves and aprons to protect [person’s name] name and them.”

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. Staff currently provided minimum support to people with their medicines. One person said, “I do it myself.” A relative told us, “Not often they (staff) give medication only if [person’s name] is on iron supplements and I forgot, they do it for me.” Whilst most people managed their medication effectively themselves, policies were in place to ensure safe administration of medicines. Most staff had received medication training.