Abhi Rose Homecare

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.

We assessed a limited number of quality statements in the safe key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good.

Though the assessment of these areas indicated areas of good practice since the last inspection, our rating for the key question remains 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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

Managers and staff understood how to safeguard people. They knew how to recognise and report abuse and were able to tell us how they would spot potential signs of abuse.

Staff were aware of safeguarding, what it meant and how they would act in response to concerns. Staff were up to date with safeguarding training. People using the service, and their relatives told us they felt safe. Comments included, “They [staff] treat me well, I feel safe,” and “I always feel safe, staff treat me wonderfully.”

Managers worked with the relevant external health and social care professionals and bodies when a concern was raised and took appropriate action to safeguard people from harm.

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 safety and wellbeing had been assessed and risk assessments were in place. Assessments considered various factors including people’s physical and mental wellbeing, eating, drinking and moving safely. Risk assessments included guidance for how staff should support people to help minimise any associated risk. Risk assessments were person centred, evidenced people’s involvement and had been regularly reviewed and updated with the relevant changes. Senior carers completed regular assessments of staff’s competencies to help ensure care was done safely. When issues were identified, actions were immediately implemented.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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. Staff received effective support, supervision, and development. Staff told us managers were supportive, and they had regular supervisions and a comprehensive induction. Staff were supported to develop in their role. Some staff were champions for example there were complex care champions, these staff had received additional training to provide care for people with complex care needs, chronic or long-term health conditions. Checks were carried out including references and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). Records demonstrated that staff had been provided with induction training and an on-going training schedule for staff was in place.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.