Dennyson 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

There was a system in place to record accidents and incidents within the service. The registered manager investigated any accident or incident and took action to reduce the risk of further occurrence and keep people safe. A member of the management team was on-call for staff to contact in case of an emergency.

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 registered manager worked closely with the local authorities and other professionals to ensure they improved the care and support they offered to people. This helped to ensure people received good quality care and support.

People's needs were assessed before they started using the service. People and their representatives were involved in the assessment process. This helped to ensure staff had enough information to enable them to meet people’s needs.

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 and their relatives told us they felt safe when staff visited them. A person told us the staff treated them with kindness and respect. A relative mentioned they felt their family member was safe using this service. They said, “I have got no issues with the carers, they are friendly.”

People were safeguarded from abuse or harm and staff understood how to keep them safe and report any concerns they had.

Staff knew of their responsibilities to protect people from harm. They were aware of the procedure to follow if they identified any concerns or if any information of concern was disclosed to them. For example, a member of staff told us, “I will report any abuse to my manager. If nothing is done, I will report it somewhere else.”

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 were assessed and management plans were in place to inform staff how to reduce and manage risks to maintain people’s safety. For example, we saw risk assessments were in place for people who were at risk of falls. Risk assessments gave guidance to staff on how best to support people in different situations. Staff told us how risk assessments gave guidance to them on how best to support people in different situations. This ensured care and support was delivered in a safe way. For example, a member of staff told us, “We look at care plan and if they client is at risk of anything, for example, if the bathroom is tight for personal care.”

Risk assessments were reviewed when people’s needs changed. This meant that people were protected against risk of harm.

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

Potential risks about people’s safety within their home were assessed to ensure they were supported to remain as safe as possible. Staff were encouraged to report any risks they had identified to the management team so that appropriate action could be taken to ensure people remained safe. Risks around peoples’ environment were monitored to ensure people remain as safe as possible whilst receiving care and support from staff.

A member of the management visited people who used the service on a regular basis to check if the environment remained safe for them to receive care and support from staff. If any issue was identified, the provider would contact the relevant professional for advice, for example, if a person needed a hoist to move them from their bed to their chair.

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.

At our last inspection, we recommended the provider review their monitoring system to ensure real time monitoring of calls, so people received their calls as planned for them.

During this assessment, we found the provider monitored when staff arrived and left for their care visits more closely. Staff used a phone application to log when they completed calls with people. Where staff had forgotten to log in and out, this had been addressed with the staff concerned. The system was monitored by a dedicated member of staff and this helped to avoid any missed visits to people.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to provide personalised care and support. People were supported by the same staff members. This helped with consistency and continuity of care as staff were aware of the needs of people and how to support them.

The provider had an effective recruitment procedure to ensure staff had the appropriate skills and experience for the role. Before newly recruited staff started employment, the provider undertook all necessary employment checks. This ensured people who used the service were not exposed to staff that were barred from caring for vulnerable people.

The provider had a training programme for all staff to complete to ensure they had the skills to meet people's needs. Records showed that staff had received training in a number of key areas relevant to their roles. For example, staff had received training in first aid, moving and handling, food safety, safeguarding and infection prevention and control. This equipped staff to care for the people who used the service and meet their needs.

Newly recruited staff received an induction when they started working at the service. This included training and ‘shadowing’ a more experienced member of staff.

The provider had systems in place to ensure all staff received the support they needed. Staff told us they were supported with supervisions to help them to carry out their role effectively and they found them useful. Staff also had annual appraisals, and these were used to review achievements and identify goals for the coming year.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. The provider and staff were aware of the ways to prevent the spread of infection such as hand hygiene, cleaning and safe management of the environment.

The provider had policies and procedures regarding the prevention and control of infection. Staff were provided with personal protective equipment such as aprons and gloves. They had received training in infection control and were aware of their roles and responsibilities for the management of infection.

There were spot checks carried out monthly to ensure staff were adhering to the guidelines around infection prevention and 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 service had suitable arrangements in place to protect the people using the service against the risks associated with the unsafe management of medicines. Where people needed assistance to take their medicine the staff helped them accordingly.

At our last inspection, we noted the provider had not always ensured staff had the skills to support people with their medicines in a safe way. We recommended the provider follow national guidance on assessing staff competency with medicines and supporting people with medicines.

During this visit, we found there was a process in place to monitor staff competencies regarding the management of medicine. The field supervisor also carried out spot checks and audits to ensure people had received their medicines safely and as prescribed.