Abbots Care Limited (East Dorset branch)

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.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed to support learning and reduce future risks. Staff understood the importance of reporting concerns and reflected on incidents as part of improving practice and keeping people safe. Staff confirmed safety events and the actions taken were shared during team meetings, supervisions and messages on the providers electronic communication portal to support learning.
Systems supported open and transparent reporting of concerns, accidents and incidents. Information was analysed to identify themes and trends, and learning was embedded through changes to practice where required. This demonstrated a positive learning culture based on openness, reflection and continuous improvement.
Staff recorded concerns on the electronic system, and managers-maintained oversight. The registered manager reviewed incidents to ensure learning was actioned and improvements were implemented promptly.
 

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.

When referrals were received, initial assessments were completed that captured people’s views, wishes and preferences, which informed the development of care plans. Appropriate referrals were made to healthcare professionals, and staff followed professional guidance, which had a positive impact on people’s care and support.

People were supported to access other services when required, and care plans included details of key services and professionals involved in their care. Staff worked closely with people, their families and health and social care professionals to ensure care was safely coordinated. External professionals provided positive feedback about the provider such as, “Abbots care have been not only insightful but have been able to provide evidence to support an identified need.” And “Care provision was clearly established at the original assessment, which was thorough and reassessments were routinely scheduled, as would be expected in a complex case”.
 

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 relatives that we spoke to all said they felt safe with the staff. The provider had safeguarding and whistleblowing policies. Staff had training and understood their responsibilities for safeguarding. Where they had concerns, they had raised these appropriately meaning action could be taken if required. A staff member said, “I would report immediately to my Registered Manager or the designated Safeguarding Lead. Externally, I will contact the Council Adult Access Team, the CQC, or the police if there is an immediate danger.” Leaders performed competency checks to test staff’s knowledge. The provider shared events with appropriate external agencies quickly and had documented actions taken.
 

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.

People and relatives felt they were supported to be involved in managing risks. Relatives, told us staff managed risks appropriately, monitored changes and ensured people’s safety inside and outside the home. Risk assessments were person‑centred and took account of people’s communication needs preferences and known triggers, however in one care plan we found inconsistencies in the descriptions of if and how a person communicates. For people who were non‑verbal, staff understood how people expressed distress and monitored early signs such as pacing, biting, object‑mouthing or changes in mood. Staff could recognise early signs of distress and respond with de‑escalation techniques suited to each person.

Records showed external professionals and families were involved when people’s needs changed.

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

People were supported in their own homes. The provider assessed environmental risks relating to each person’s property . This included the locations of utilities such as the gas main shut off, the water stop cock and the electricity panel and trip switches. This ensured in an emergency such as an unexplained smell of gas, staff could act to ensure they and people were safe. Guidance was available to staff in people’s support plans about how to manage any identified risks and maintain a safe environment. This included consideration of factors like pets, security, and equipment.
 

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.

Care staff were positive in their feedback about having the resources they needed to carry out their work and support people. They told us, “Yes, we have enough staff at the moment.”
The provider carried out pre-employment checks including Disclosure and Barring Service checks (DBS), employment history and pre-employment interviews. We found evidence of gaps in employment history were challenged by the provider to ensure a complete record was held on file.

Staff were usually allocated to work with the same people which helped to keep consistency of care and all visits were recorded. A benefit of this was that it helped to build positive relationships between care staff and the people they were caring for. People commented on this in their feedback to us, “They make sure they send the same and the right people come to support (person), so they know”. People also told us that they were informed of changes, when these are needed, to the person coming to provide their care.
 

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 effective systems in place to prevent and control infection. Staff followed current infection prevention guidance and used personal protective equipment (PPE) to reduce the risk of cross infection. The registered manager told us, that staff have access to PPE at central hubs and staff inform them of what is required, and can collect it at their convenience. Staff confirmed there was always an adequate supply of PPE. Training records we reviewed showed staff had undertaken training in infection control as part of their induction and mandatory training.
 

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.

People told us they received support with their medicines as requested and this was discussed with them prior to commencing their care.

Records showed staff had completed medicines related training and had regular competency assessments to support safe management and administration of medicines. Medicines were recorded on an electronic system which provided a live record of administration. This meant changes to people’s medicines were implemented immediately and visible to all relevant staff.

Information on people’s medicine allergies was clearly documented to ensure staff awareness. The provider had effective medicine management systems in place and audited medicine administration charts. This supported safe delivery of care.