Apollo Home Healthcare Limited-North West

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.
The management and quality team were open and transparent and wanted to drive improvement. Staff were encouraged to report any concerns to management. Where incidents had occurred, these were investigated thoroughly by the quality team and relevant information was shared with healthcare professionals as appropriate, ensuring the safety of the people supported and best outcomes moving forwards.
Learning from accidents and incidents was shared with staff and discussed at clinical meetings, driving improvement and reducing the risk of similar incidents occurring again. Further training was also provided where appropriate. Staff understood the importance of reporting incidents and felt comfortable to do so.
Feeback was regularly sought from people who used the service or their relatives, and this was used to understand where improvement might be needed. One person told us, “I have been asked to give feedback about my experience with them. I have private sessions with a consultant where we discuss how things are going. They are coming in next week. We have a dedicated nurse, and I can always talk to (them).”

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.

Staff worked collaboratively with other healthcare professionals which helped to ensure, people received safe, continuous care. This was imperative due to the complexity of the care needs, people had when they were discharged from hospital. A structured approach and knowledgeable staff ensured all relevant information was obtained and documented. This also ensured the correct level of support was provided for people with a learning disability.

Feedback from healthcare professionals was positive, saying, “Apollo are easy to contact and responsive to correspondence” and “Apollo staff demonstrate that they understand the training provided and are able to implement clinical interventions they have been trained and signed off to deliver.”
Some healthcare partners did identify gaps in care occurred at times due to staff sickness or shortages. However, it was acknowledged that this was mainly out of the control of the management as due to the nature of the service they provided, only a certain number of staff were trained on the specific needs of the person that was being supported.
Overall, the service was praised for good communication, training and an effective transition process. One healthcare professional said, “Throughout the (discharge) process, I was kept fully updated, as were the patient and (their) family. Apollo also arranged several shadow shifts to ensure a smooth transition and to reduce any anxieties for both the patient and the new carers. The patient consistently provided positive feedback and expressed confidence about going home.”

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.
Staff received safeguarding training and could confidently identify signs of abuse. The service had a safeguarding adults policy and a safeguarding children and young people policy which ensured staff understood how to protect people they supported from abuse and harm.
Staff explained clearly the process for escalating any concerns and understood the importance of safeguarding people. One staff member said, “At all times I ensure that my client is safe from harm/abuse or neglect in accordance to the training that I received.”
People who used the service said they felt completely safe with the carers and were confident in their abilities and training. One person said, “We certainly feel safe when the carers are around.”
The quality manager maintained oversight of safeguarding concerns through audits and analysis and the registered manager explained the process followed when a safeguarding concern was raised which involved sharing information with the wider community, such as a school, when appropriate.
 

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.
There was a proactive approach to risk management which ensured people’s safety by identifying, assessing and reducing potential harm. Risk assessments were completed for all aspects of care including equipment, choking and PEG feeding.
A balanced approach to risk ensured people still had choice and autonomy, for example, one person chose to eat foods outside of the guidance provided by the Speech and Language Therapy Team (SALT). A comprehensive risk assessment was in place with details about the escalation process if required and it was documented that while the family may provide these foods the care staff from Apollo Home Healthcare would follow the guidance provided by SALT.
 

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’s homes were assessed to ensure they were safe for individuals and staff. A risk assessment checklist was completed for each person which identified all external and internal areas that could present as a risk. Regular maintenance checks were made on the equipment used in people’s homes to ensure they were in good working order.
 

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 were recruited safely with the necessary checks completed before they began working for the service. New staff received a structured induction, training and shadowing period and competency had to be demonstrated before a staff member could be signed off to provide care. Due to the complex needs of the people using the service, competencies were not transferable and staff were trained specifically for the package of care that they delivered.
 

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.
People told us staff supported them in ways which promoted good infection prevention and control (IPC), helping them to feel safe in their own homes. One person told us, “They always take hygiene precautions e.g. wearing gloves and aprons.”
We saw evidence of IPC audits which took place during spot checks to check that the IPC policy and guidance was being adhered to.
 

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacity and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.
An assessment was completed to understand the level of support people required to manage their medicines safely. This information was recorded in each person’s medication care plan and staff received training and competency checks to ensure they could administer medicines safely. The nurses employed by the service were responsible for transcribing the medications onto each person’s MAR chart and had oversight of medicines and any errors that may occur. Care staff were confident in their responsibilities regarding medicines and reporting any inconsistencies or queries to the clinical lead for that package.