Health Tech Services Group 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 Health Tech Services Limited. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (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 registered manager and staff discussed learning they had experienced during team meetings. Staff were involved in improvements to the care provided. There was a policy and procedure to report accidents and incidents, staff understood the process to follow. Management told us how they would review incidents and share learning and actions with staff.

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.

The provider worked closely with family members to ensure they had the information required to effectively assess and provide care to support people’s needs. Care plans and risk assessments were developed following assessments, and people and relatives were involved. When people left the service information was shared by the provider to assist with continuity of care.

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.

People told us they felt safe when being supported by staff. One person said, “I have no concerns and happy with the care provided.” Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to recognise potential signs of abuse. They were aware of how to escalate concerns for people’s safety. The provider had systems in place to ensure any concerns were appropriately investigated and referred to appropriate partners.

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 in place were generic and not person centred. Risk assessments identified risks to people not relevant to their personal needs. Generic control measures were documented in risk assessments. This meant people were at risk of not receiving appropriate actions in the event of an incident. Risk assessments were reviewed following the provider’s policy.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The provider did not ensure equipment used was correctly checked. The equipment was provided by an equipment supplier directly to a person. However, there was no certificate to evidence equipment was in date and Lifting Operations, Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER) had been checked. The registered manager told us they would action this. Assessments were completed to ensure people’s home environments were safe for them and the staff who supported them. Any changes were reported to the management team, who updated risk assessments to ensure staff had up to date information available to them when providing care and support.

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.

We saw evidence there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. One person told us, ‘I have no concerns with staff’. People were supported by a consistent staff team. Staff were matched to meet people’s cultural needs and preferences. Staff had received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people well. Staff had been safely recruited. Pre-employment checks had been carried out by the provider to ensure staff were safe to work with people.

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 had a policy and procedure to ensure correct standards of infection control were in place. Procedures were present to ensure staff were wearing and using appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).Records showed spot checks were being carried out and these included the monitoring of the use of PPE. Training records showed staff had undertaken training in infection control.

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 provider had a medication policy. The policy detailed how the provider would ensure staff provided support with medicines and treatments in a safe way that met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Training records evidenced staff had completed medication training. Staff inductions included a senior member of staff or management completing an observation before staff were able to administer medication. At the time of this assessment the service was not providing medication support to any person.