Aland Healthcare Agency

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

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 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 provider had a system for staff to report and record incidents using incident log] Staff understood how to raise concerns and said they could seek guidance from the manager. Staff discussed practice and learning through supervision, spot checks and team meetings. We reviewed supervision records, meeting minutes, audit records, which showed that feedback and areas for improvement were shared with staff. There had been no recent incidents or complaints requiring formal 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.

The provider worked with GPs, district nurses, pharmacies, hospitals and local authority teams when people needed additional support. A professional described communication as thorough, clear and timely. People’s records included routes for reporting changes and seeking advice.

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 said they felt safe. One person said, “I feel safe with the carers, and she is very gentle and kind.” Staff explained how they would protect a person, report concerns immediately and complete an incident record. Safeguarding and whistleblowing formed part of induction and training. The registered manager understood when concerns should be reported to the local authority and the Care Quality Commission.

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 records contained up-to-date risk assessments covering falls, choking, pressure damage, mobility, bathing and continence. These reflected people’s current needs and included practical guidance for staff, such as pacing support, safe positioning, supervision and reporting changes. Records showed that people and, where appropriate, their relatives were involved in reviewing risks and discussing how these should be managed. People told us regular staff knew their needs and supported them safely.

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

The provider assessed risks in people’s homes, including moving and handling, bathing, stairs and equipment. Care instructions described how staff should support transfers and positioning. A relative said care workers had received equipment training from a health professional and provided safe care.

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.

People received support from regular care workers who knew their routines. A relative said the service had “never missed a call”, and other people said visits were usually on time. Staff completed pre-employment checks, induction, shadowing and competency assessments before working alone. Records showed systems for supervision, appraisal and spot checks. However, some forms were not fully completed. We raised this with the registered manager, who agreed to ensure staff records were completed consistently.

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.

The provider assessed infection risks linked to personal care, continence, food hygiene and skin care. Induction and training covered infection prevention and spot checks considered protective equipment and hygiene practice. People raised no concerns about infection prevention and control. We found no evidence of related harm.

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.

People said staff reminded them about medicines and made sure they took their tablets. We found no evidence of a missed or incorrect dose. In 1 record, the care plan and medicines administration record did not list the same information. Staff may have been confused if they relied on both documents. The evidence did not show that the person received unsafe medicines support, so this was primarily a record accuracy and oversight issue. The registered manager later confirmed that the issue had been resolved. They had also introduced measures to prevent it from happening again.