Angels Care Solutions

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

People and their relatives told us they would speak with staff if they had any concerns. One person told us, “No complaints. My [person] will speak to the manager if my [person] is unhappy about something."

Staff we spoke with told us they felt confident about reporting any concerns or poor practice to their managers. One staff member told us, “Yes, I would say they have, if you have an issue they make it right.”

There was a system in place to learn from lessons following incidents. The provider had systems to ensure lessons were learnt from any incidents. Where incidents and accidents occurred, they were recorded with appropriate actions taken to reduce the risk of re-occurrence. Incident and accident records showed issues were recorded, investigated and addressed quickly. There was evidence of actions taken to mitigate future risks.

Staff had access to the information they needed to deliver safe care. Office staff carried out regular staff spot checks to ensure they were confident and competent in their roles in supporting people. This was also an opportunity ensure people’s risks were being managed effectively and to identify any changing needs. A member of staff told us where people’s needs had changed, they liaised with other professionals such as the person’s GP, pharmacist or other health services.

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.

People told us they were able to openly speak with staff and management. They were aware of the complaints process and felt their concerns would be addressed.The registered manager told us they took account of all information available from the person, their family and any health care professionals involved in their care, when supporting their transition to the service. One relative told us, “A social worker connected me to Angels Care Solutions. I have to say there were a few teething problems at the beginning. We now have three regular care workers, and the company are really good, very good.”

The provider carried out an assessment of people’s needs before they began to use the service. This meant they were able to plan any resources such as staff rotas and visit plans.

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 were safe in the presence of care staff in their homes and no concerns were raised. One relative said, “I have the same carer, and I feel safe leaving [person] with her when I have a break.” Another relative said, "[Person] feels safe with the carer and I am happy too, of course big relief. If the carers are stuck in the traffic, they always let us know.”

Safeguarding procedures were in place. These provided guidance about the action to take if staff had concerns about the welfare of people. Training records showed staff had completed safeguarding training.

Staff told us they felt confident reporting concerns to management and wouldn’t hesitate to do so. They knew how to recognise and report abuse and were able to tell us the signs of abuse. A member of staff told us, “Safeguarding means to protect the clients from harm, we have to write everything down and report it to the manager.” The registered manager understood their legal responsibility in relation to reporting any safeguarding concerns. Registered manager confirmed there were no current safeguarding concerns.

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. These assessments considered people’s physical and mental wellbeing, accessing the community, eating, drinking and moving safely. Risk assessments included detail about how staff should support people to help minimise the associated risk. These included personalised information and had been regularly reviewed and updated. For example, one relative described how staff changed person catheter from the leg bag to the overnight bag saying, “They absolutely know what they are doing, they are completely reliable and turn up on time if they are going to be late, they will let me know, I have carers during the week and others at the weekend.”

Staff undertook a range of training to understand how to care for people safely. Management carried out assessments of staff’s competencies and observed them providing care to help ensure this was done safely.

The registered manager explained they would discuss any possible risks that were indicated during the initial needs assessment. They said that if a person was identified as having a history of falls, they would check to see if the person had been referred to a falls clinic. They would work with the person and their family to identify a reason for the falls and develop a risk management plan.

People told us staff helped to keep their homes free from clutter.

Managers and staff told us they supported people to live safely in their homes.

Where people required the use of aids for safe moving and handling risk assessments were in place to support staff to be able to use this equipment safety. Environment risk assessment was completed to ensure safety of 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.

Staffing levels and skill mix to make sure people received consistently safe, good quality care that met their needs. A comment from a relative included, “They come 4 times per day, those times suit me, they help me with [person] medication and blister packs.” Another relative said, “[Person] wanted to have male care workers, and they have provided male care workers, they have been consistent over at least two years.”

Staff said they were happy with the training and support they received. A staff member told us, “Yes, one service user has dementia and sickle cell, and another service user has PEG feeding. I received additional training to look after them. Sickle cell training was provided by an external person.” Staff told us they felt supported by their managers and were able to discuss any issues in individual supervision and team meetings.

There were robust and safe recruitment practices to make sure that all staff were suitably experienced, competent and able to carry out their role. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were carried out. These provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff received the support they needed to deliver safe care. This included supervision, appraisal and support to develop and improve services.

People and relatives told us care staff followed infection control processes, including washing their hands, keeping people’s home’s clean and wearing personal protective equipment (PPE).

Staff confirmed they had completed training in infection prevention and control and demonstrated a good understating of the measures to manage and prevent the spread of infection.

We saw that the provider had policies and procedures regarding the prevention and control of infection, and they kept staff up to date with relevant national guidance.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

Effective medicines management systems were in place. Since the previous inspection, the agency had implemented an electronic system for monitoring medicines administration. People’s medicines support needs were documented in their care plan. Care staff recorded medicines administration electronically so that the office could monitor this in real time. We looked at a sample of Medicines Administration Records (MARs) and found that these were completed fully indicating that medicines had been administered as prescribed.

One relative told us, “We know now when [person] takes their tablet. [Person] has 2 tablets four times a day and used to get very muddled. The carers now make sure they are put out in front of [person] at the correct times of the day, and it seems to work well.”

Staff had their competency to administer people’s medicines safely assessed to help ensure they had the skills and knowledge to do so. Staff told us they had received the appropriate training and were confident in administering medicines to people, when required.