Help at Home Care

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.

A system was in place whereby incidents were recorded using a detailed incident reporting form. A system was in operation to ensure all identified actions were completed ensuring accountability and oversight.

The provider embedded learning into practice. Lessons learned were shared consistently with staff through multiple channels, including team meetings, email communications, and teaching sessions. A staff member told us, “We get updates about incidents and accidents via email.” This approach ensured staff remained informed and that learning was disseminated effectively across the service.

Spot checks on staffs' abilities were undertaken when required to provide additional assurance and to monitor compliance. There was a strong focus on prevention, with systems in place to identify risks early and reduce future incidents.

Complaints were investigated thoroughly, actions were implemented, and feedback was provided following the outcome, ensuring transparency and continuous learning.

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.

Pre-admission assessments were completed face to face with the person and, where appropriate, their relatives. This was confirmed by a relative who told us, “[The pre- admission process] was straight forward, they involved us and came out before.” Following the assessment, all relevant information was transferred onto the provider’s electronic system, which was accessible to staff. Staff were required to review this information prior to undertaking visits to ensure they were fully informed and prepared.

Risk assessments and care plans were completed in advance of the first care visit and were formally signed off before staff attended. This ensured that appropriate measures were in place to support safe care delivery from the outset.

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 their relatives felt safe under the care of the provider, a relative told us, “Yes very safe.” A safeguarding training matrix was reviewed, which confirmed that all staff delivering care were up to date with their safeguarding training.

The provider used a safeguarding log, which evidenced a robust process for recording, monitoring, and managing safeguarding concerns. Entries detailed actions taken and outcomes, demonstrating appropriate oversight and accountability.

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.

The provider demonstrated a person-centred approach to risk management by actively involving people and their relatives in care planning and risk assessment processes. People and relatives were involved in the development of care plans, risk assessments, and all subsequent reviews, ensuring that care remained responsive to changing needs and preferences.

Where risks were identified, appropriate control measures were implemented. For example, a person who showed their distress and agitation though their behaviour was consistently supported by 2 members of staff to ensure their safety and the safety of others. This demonstrated that staffing arrangements were responsive to assessed risks. Records reviewed confirmed that all staff were up to date with training in managing challenging behaviour.

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

Environmental risk assessments were completed for all people using the service. These assessments identified potential hazards within individuals’ home environments and outlined appropriate control measures to ensure the safety of both the person receiving care and staff delivering support.

The provider also ensured staff were appropriately trained in lone working practices. This supported staff to work safely and confidently when delivering care in people’s homes.

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.

The provider demonstrated safe and effective recruitment processes. Systems were in place to support staff performance and development. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals, alongside spot checks and competency assessments to ensure they maintained the required standards of care.

The provider operated an electronic rota system which monitored both planned and actual visits. This system enabled effective oversight of care delivery and staff attendance. Where staff were late, an alert system was in place to notify management, and there was always an on-call person available to respond and take appropriate action. In addition, the provider monitored themes and trends within the rota system. Any issues identified, such as lateness or inconsistencies, were addressed with staff to support improvement and maintain service reliability.

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.

Hand hygiene practices were monitored through spot checks, providing assurance that staff followed correct procedures when delivering care. This supported the reduction of infection risks within people’s homes.

Training records confirmed that all staff were up to date with infection prevention and control training. This ensured staff had the necessary knowledge to maintain high standards of hygiene and prevent the spread of infection.

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.

Medication administration records (MAR) were in place and completed appropriately, providing a clear record of medicines administered. Where required, ‘as and when’ required (PRN) protocols were in place, offering clear guidance to staff on when and how these medicines should be administered.

Staff competency in medicines management was assessed, ensuring that staff were confident and capable in administering medicines safely. Training records confirmed that staff were up to date with medicines training.

The provider also completed regular medicines audits. These audits supported oversight, identified any areas for improvement, and ensured ongoing compliance with best practice.