Cheriton Homecare 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.

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 documented and investigated fully to minimise risk and promote learning opportunities. There was an open and transparent culture at the service and staff told us they would be confident in reporting any matters necessary and these would be followed up. The registered manager highlighted regular learning opportunities and had consistent oversight to drive improvement at the service. People and their relatives also spoke highly of the open ethos at the service. One relative said, “There has only ever been 1 incident in 2 years, but this was quickly highlighted and rectified and I felt there was good communication throughout.”

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.

People were supported to access a range of healthcare services as and when they required them. Staff, including office staff and the registered manager, had good relationships with external agencies which enabled smooth transitions between services. People’s care plans detailed all agencies which were involved in a person’s care, so staff can refer directly to these in a timely manner should they need to. People were supported to attend appointments where this was required.

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 consistently told us they felt safe in the presence of staff. One person said, “[Staff] treat me well. They do their best. It took a bit of getting used to from looking after myself, but I feel comfortable with them here.” Staff had received appropriate training and knew how to recognise the signs of abuse. They spoke of confidence in any matters being addressed quickly by the registered manager and office staff.

There was an up to date and relevant safeguarding policy in place which staff demonstrated good knowledge of. The registered manager was the safeguarding lead for the service and had reported matters appropriately to external agencies, such as the local authority. Where concerns had been raised, the person was kept at the forefront of any action taken. The registered manager had a robust knowledge of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and where necessary had taken steps to ensure practice was in line with this.

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.

Risks had been assessed and measures were in place to minimise these were possible. Guidance on how to support people to remain safe was detailed in the care documents. Relatives spoke of staff taking positive risks to ensure people lived good lives, one told us, “It’s not just about being safe, it’s taking those risks to help [person] to live.”

The registered manager was actively working on and trialling a new risk assessment form which was more interactive and specific to a person’s needs. This will enable staff to be more creative in their risk management and shape care around the individual. This will need time to develop but shows the service is looking at ways to improve outcomes for people.

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

Risk assessments in relation to people’s own environments had been undertaken and were regularly reviewed. Where risks had been identified, measures had been put in place to minimise these. For example, if a person was at risk of falling, there was guidance to ensure pathways remained clear and decluttered. Staff were reminded to undertake regular safety checks of equipment to ensure the person’s environment remained safe. If any issues were identified, these were quickly remedied. People told us that they felt staff respected them and their property, supporting them to keep it clean and tidy.

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 had received training appropriate to their role and spoke of the confidence that this provided them with. Where specialist training was required, this was arranged for staff. Staffing levels were suitable to meet each person’s needs and people told us they were kept well informed about who would be providing this. The registered manager had a robust recruitment process in place which included a number of pre-employment checks to ensure staff were suitable for the role. Where possible, people and staff were matched on their likes and dislikes.

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.

Staff received appropriate training and understood their responsibilities in maintaining high standards of cleanliness in people’s homes. This included supporting people to undertake domestic tasks independently where possible. People told us that staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) when necessary and regular spot checks by the office team provided oversight of this. Policies were in place to minimise the risk of infection spread and highlighted the importance of disposing of waste appropriately.

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.

Where people required support with their medicines, this was done in a safe manner. Medicine administration records (MARs) were electronic and contained clear instructions for staff to follow to ensure suitable administration and storage. If people required time specific medicines, their care was arranged to ensure this was administered consistently and in line with the required time frames. One person told us, “My medication is very well managed and controlled by my carers. They are always on time.” Staff received regular training and spot checks were completed by the office staff to ensure compliance. The compliance officer had good oversight of the medicines and MAR charts. If any issues were identified, these were quickly responded to and resolved to ensure people’s safety.