1 Homecare Bradford

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. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider had robust systems in place to record safety events, such as accidents and incidents. These were discussed with staff, to inform learning and mitigate future risks. Team meeting and supervision records as well as staff interviews confirmed that learning was shared across the whole workforce. Monthly audits were undertaken to ensure that information recording was consistent.Incidents were reported in good time to CQC.

Relatives confirmed that staff communicated effectively and took appropriate action when risks were identified. This included reporting concerns such as falls, bruising, and changes in condition.

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.

Care plans demonstrated effective links between the provider and other partner organisations involved with people’s care and support. The manager was often involved in home visits prior to commencement of the service which left a good impression with people and relatives, who told us that they were listened to and felt confident that the provider understood their needs.

Staff said if there were any urgent changes or issues, they were made aware by management.

People told us they were generally supported by a consistent team of carers, which promoted familiarity and continuity of care.

A relative told us: “The carers are very good, they will send me a message if they have any concerns, they report any bruises [my relative] gets and take action while keeping me informed”.

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.

Staff had a good awareness of safeguarding principles. They told us what they would do if concerns were raised by people they were caring for.

People told us they felt safe receiving care and support. They described staff as approachable and supportive, and they felt confident raising concerns.

One person told us, “I have been through a lot in the last couple of years, I can talk to them.”

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.

Risks to people’s health and safety were discussed with people and their families as well as other partners in care such as social workers. The care plans were enhanced by regular handover notes completed by staff in a timely manner, with an alert system in place to be informed to any short-notice changes. Staff were able to describe how they discussed risk with people they were caring for. They told us that support was available for them if they needed additional advice.

Risk assessments were included in people’s electronic care records. One person told us, “The first thing the carers ask me is, have I taken my tablets and am I wearing my safe and sound pendant.”

Another person told us, “My mum is a nurse and has very high standards; mum trusts them to care for me.”

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

As part of the process taking place prior to starting to deliver care, the manager or a senior colleague would visit people’s homes to discuss any potential environmental safety issues with people and families.

Staff told us they received training and shadowed more experienced colleagues which helped them to spot if anything was unsafe in people’s homes.

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.

Staffing levels were sufficient to cover all planned care; and this was supported by people’s experience.

Staff told us there were enough of them to complete planned calls and that they were able to meet people’s needs in the time available.

People told us staff seemed well trained and were confident about their skills.

Comments included, “They all went away to Manchester for training; they are very professional” and “If someone new starts they shadow an experienced carer before they are allowed to visit on their own.”

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.

Care plans, notifications to CQC and correspondence with partner organisations demonstrated the provider had a good awareness of best practice in infection prevention and control. Any risks relating to infection prevention and control were discussed with people and their families at the time of commencement of care.

Staff told us they had time to ensure areas of people’s homes were clean. People told us staff assisted with hygiene tasks when they were unable to. Some people said staff prompted them to undertake tasks.

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. Medicines were managed safely.Information was in place to inform staff about who was responsible for the ordering, collecting, storage and administering medicines.

Medicines administration records (MARs) were used to record the administration of medicines. The MARs were generated and written by the service and there was a clear process in place to ensure they accurately represented the information written on the prescriptions. MARs indicated people received their medicines as prescribed.

People’s allergies were accurately recorded. Additional information about the administration of medicines on a ‘when required’ basis was present in the form of written protocols. A system was in place to record the application of medicated patches being applied on to the body.

Staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines safely. A staff member told us, “I check for quantity and timing of a dose needed, check expiry date, make sure medicines are stored at the right temperature and then give them to the person.”

Audits showed medicines were managed safely and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed. People told us that they felt safe regarding medicines administration. Feedback from people and relatives included, “They put my tablets in a pot and give them to me. They make sure I take them" and “I do my own tablets, but the carers check that I have taken them” and

“Carers will put cream on [my relative’s] skin if they need it, they will only apply what has been prescribed by the GP.”