Argent Care Limited

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 newly registered 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. Staff listened to concerns about safety and the provider was aware to identify opportunities to continually identify and embed good practice.

This was a newly established domiciliary care service, and the provider’s focus was on delivering safe, consistent, and person-centred care to meet the individual needs of the person using the service. The provider had an open culture and a positive approach to identifying opportunities to learn as the service developed.
 

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.

There was evidence of good communication between the provider and other professionals involved in the person’s care. The person’s advocate told us communication between themselves and the provider was also good, for example, if the person needed any medical treatment or advice.

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. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

There was a clear policy and procedure around safeguarding and staff understood how to identify and report any concerns. Staff received training in safeguarding and were confident in what to do should any concerns arise. The person using the service was represented by their advocate, who said they were confident the person was 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.

Staff had a clear understanding of the individual risks to the person they supported, and how to make sure they worked as safely as possible. They knew what equipment the person needed, and how to operate this safely. The person’s advocate said the person disliked using their hoist, but staff were ‘very gentle’ and gave plenty of reassurances when managing the risks of moving and handling the person.

Risk assessments were in place and care plans highlighted the tasks required to support the person safely. The registered manager told us there was additional guidance in the person’s home, such as from the occupational therapist to ensure they were able to mitigate potential risks.

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

The provider made sure staff understood any risks in their working environment and the person was cared for safely in their own home. Care records gave clear information about any potential environmental risks, and guidance on the safe use of equipment used by the person.

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 made sure staffing levels met the needs of the person receiving care. There was safe recruitment and effective care planning to make sure enough staff attended to the person’s needs. Staff provided flexibility to cover absences so the person’s care was not missed.

A small team of staff worked together to provide care at the person’s required times. Staff were robustly recruited and received induction, training and competency checks to make sure they had the right skills to meet the person’s needs.

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 ensured robust infection, prevention and control procedures, including staff training and a good supply of PPE to meet the person’s needs.

Infection risks were identified, managed, and reduced, protecting the health, safety, and wellbeing of the person using the service, and the staff team.

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.

The person was supported by their advocate with their medicines and the staff worked in partnership with them to make sure their needs were met. The person was prompted to take their medicine and supported to do so independently.