MiHomecare Kensington and Chelsea

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

People received a safe service, provided by enough appropriately recruited, and trained staff employed to meet their needs. This meant people were supported to live safely. The registered manager, and management team assessed, monitored, and recorded risks to people that were also reported by care staff. Accidents, incidents, and safeguarding concerns were reported, investigated, recorded appropriately, and learnt from. Staff received appropriate training to administer, prompt, and support people to take their medicines, if necessary. Infection control procedures were followed.

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.

Most people told us the service had a learning culture regarding keeping people safe, and this made them feel safe, although this had not always been the case. Previously a relative had asked for a member of the care staff to be changed, as the relationship was not working, and were assured this would happen. However, the same care staff continued to be rostered for the person using the service. The management team explained this was due to a manual entry to the electronic 3 weekly rota system, and was now rectified. People said they were supported to understand and manage any risks to them. They were given information, and advice about health, care, support, and how to keep as physically, mentally, and emotionally well as possible.

The registered manager, management team and staff, said that people’s safety was a priority, everyone’s responsibility, and maintained by being open, transparent, and learning from experiences where things had gone wrong, and people were put at risk. Staff said they were now supported, and encouraged to raise any concerns to minimise risk to people without limiting their choices. Previously they had experienced some difficulty contacting the office staff, and registered manager. This was no longer the case.

The provider had thorough, up to date processes that enabled learning from incidents where people may have been put at risk. This promoted people’s safety as a priority whilst not limiting their choices and empowered them to take acceptable risks.

People were kept safe by the registered manager, management team, and staff being knowledgeable about the people they provided a service for, the importance of working together, and using a joined up approach with people, their relatives, healthcare professionals, within their teams, and in a systematic, planned way.

Healthcare professionals commented that whilst there were areas for improvement the new registered manager, had settled into her role well and was responsive in addressing challenges that occurred. They were also pleased with the way the service was being managed, the service was performing well against the local authority key performance indicators, and “It was fair to say it was well led."

The provider had up to date processes, and systems that were followed, enabling continuity of safe care, and joined up working. Relationships with healthcare professionals were established to promote, and maintain people’s safety. The provider's policies, procedures, and processes were in line with current, relevant legislation.

People and their relatives said they felt the service was safe to use, and the support they received was what they needed. They said the staff supporting people understood how to keep them safe. A person said, “The staff are lovely, and make me feel safe.” A relative told us, “I’m satisfied that [Person using the service] is kept safe."

The management team and staff understood what constated abuse, neglect, how to protect people from its different forms and to report any concerns appropriately. The pathway system recording was followed to keep people safe. The registered manager, and management team had a clear understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and that they were only used when it was in the best interest of the person.

The provider had efficient safeguarding policies, procedures, and processes that followed current, relevant legislation. The systems demonstrated safety concerns were reported to the registered manager, recorded, monitored frequently, and raised with appropriate bodies in a timely way. As appropriate, people and those important to them were involved in this process and informed about what action would be taken to keep people safe.

People and their relatives said the standard of care and support provided was good. Risks to people’s safety were professionally managed, without unnecessary restrictions in place. They told us staff knew how to support people with identified risks, and that they were involved in planning the care they received. This enabled them to decide what risks were acceptable, and which they were prepared to take.

The registered manager, and management team explained and demonstrated how people were able to take acceptable risks by staff following their regularly reviewed and updated risk assessments. The risk assessments covered all aspects of people’s health, daily living, and social activities. The provider carried out general risk assessments that were regularly reviewed, updated, and included equipment used to support people and identified risks for staff in people’s homes.

Risks to people were assessed, and up to date care plans in place to help staff prevent or minimise the identified risks, where possible. Risks included supporting people with their personal care, and mobility. This meant staff had up to date information about the action they should take to manage these risks and keep people safe. The systems also enabled, and supported staff to report concerns, incidents, and accidents in a timely way to keep people safe, minimise risks, and incidents, accidents avoid them being repeated. This enabled the provider to have oversight of and be able to manage risks. The management team completed regular audits and care plans updated if new risks were identified.

People did not directly comment regarding a safe environment, as this was their own home. They did comment that they felt safe.

Environmental risk assessments were carried out prior to a service being provided. They were regularly updated, highlighted any issues, and were forwarded to appropriate healthcare professionals regarding people’s homes, and to protect staff.

The processes in place were followed, and identified areas of concern regarding risks, and hazards in people’s homes to them, and staff.

People and their relatives told us that since the arrival of the new registered manager, the care and support provided was better organised, and was now much better. There were enough skilled, and well trained staff available to support them, and they received care when they needed it. A person told us, “I’m satisfied, they turn up on time, and do what they are supposed to do."

The staff told us there were enough of them to support people with their care needs, and they had enough time to do this in the correct way. The registered manager, and management team regularly reviewed staffing levels to ensure there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff were given regular, relevant, good quality training to support them in their roles. They told us, the registered manager and management team well supported them to learn from and continuously improve their working practices. Staff said the training enabled them to deliver good quality support, and they were knowledgeable about the areas they were trained in.

The provider staff recruitment process was thorough, and records demonstrated it was followed, and regularly reviewed. Staff received training that was comprehensive and based on the Skills for Care 'Common induction standards. They form part of the Care Certificate which is an agreed set of standards that define the knowledge, skills and behaviours expected of specific job roles in the health and social sectors. Disciplinary and capability processes were fair, and regularly reviewed to ensure there was no disadvantage based on any specific protected equality characteristics. The processes enabled staff to receive appropriate, comprehensive training that was relevant to their role. They were supported to deliver safe care by receiving regular supervision, appraisals, development support, and being encouraged to participate in service improvement.

People told us that staff wore appropriate clothing to prevent, control, and reduce infection. A person using the service said, “They wear gloves, and stuff.”

The management team and staff were aware of the importance of keeping people’s homes and equipment clean, hygienic, and free of infection. They also confirmed they had received appropriate training that was regularly reviewed.

People told us they received their medicines when they were supposed to, and staff supported them to take them. A person using the service said, “They help me take my pills on time.”

The registered manager and management team said appropriate medicines training was provided, and regularly refreshed. This was confirmed by staff, who told us the training provided was good, and what they needed. They added that all care provided was important, and particularly medicines administration, and support.

There were processes that were followed, recorded, and audited including MAR sheet completion, and field co-ordinator spot checks, phone calls to people using the service, and welfare monitoring visits.