Aware 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 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.

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 knew how to share concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff had received training and were knowledgeable about safeguarding practices, and how to recognise signs that may indicate abuse. Staff and the management team were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and systems and processes were in place to ensure that people were safeguarded from the risk of abuse and could live safely in their homes. People told us they felt safe.

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. Care plans included assessments for risks such as falls, skin integrity, environment and nutrition. These were detailed, person -centred, and updated to remain reflective of people’s current circumstances. Robust systems were in place to enable staff to raise concerns or changes to people’s care, and senior leaders responded promptly to these using technology, such as apps.

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

Recruitment procedures were in place, including robust background checks, to ensure that staff were recruited safely. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team and had regular spot checks and supervisions. A staff member told us, “I can contact [manager] at any time, and they always listen and support me.”

Staff training was up to date and appropriate to the role, and staff had a good mix of skills and experience. Rotas were organised to prioritise continuity of care, and the service tried to be as flexible as possible to meet both people’s and staff’s needs. One person told us, "The staff have skills and common sense, and both of these are needed.”

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.