Azure 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 81 (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 worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. Staff discussed incidents in team meetings and made changes to care plans to reduce risks. For example, following a fall, the care team reviewed responsibilities and updated the care plan to include bin management during visits.

The provider ensured people experienced safe and well-coordinated transitions between services. Staff advocated for people during hospital admissions and proactively planned for discharge. For example, when a person was admitted to hospital, carers attended to share the persons’ care preferences with medical staff. Prior to discharge from hospital, staff visited the person to assess any changes in need, and supervisors attended initial home visits to adjust care arrangements. [JB1][KW2]A person said, “They came to hospital to discuss, and then back at home with proposals.” This approach ensured continuity of care and reduced the risk of readmission. People felt reassured and supported during vulnerable transitions.

Staff were trained in safeguarding and followed the provider’s policy. Safeguarding was a standard agenda item for meetings. Staff described safeguarding as “protecting clients from harm, abuse or neglect” and knew how to escalate concerns. A person said, “They [staff] are very professional in how they deal with me. You can talk to them about anything”.

People were actively involved in managing risks related to their care. Risk assessments were detailed and person-centred, with mitigation actions clearly recorded. For example, following a fall, the provider reviewed care records with the person and their spouse, and made a referral to occupational therapy. Each risk was scored and control measures were implemented, such as equipment checks and skin integrity monitoring.

A person said, “The co-ordinator came round and did risk assessments. [Name] does the care plan reviews. She is so approachable.”

This proactive approach enabled people to remain safe while maintaining independence and choice.

People lived in safe environments that were regularly assessed for risks. Environmental assessments included fire safety, utilities, and room-specific hazards. Where fire safety concerns were identified the agency took a proactive approach, referrals were made to Kent Fire and Rescue Service who visited the person in their home and took action. For example, a person who was hard of hearing and living with dementia received a visual and vibrating alarm system beside their bed, ensuring they could be alerted in case of fire. Another couple received tailored evacuation advice and had their smoke alarm relocated for better effectiveness. Other people who were at identified risk and lived alone received targeted fire and practical safety advice. Batteries in smoke alarms were replaced for some people. These actions significantly improved the safety of people within their homes in the event of an emergency. These adaptations had a measurable impact on people’s safety and peace of mind, particularly for those at higher risk due to health or environmental factors. Families reported feeling reassured and confident in the safety of their loved ones.

People received care from a consistent staff team who were well-trained and recruited safely. Staff felt supported and received regular support and supervision. The electronic rostering system prioritised regular carers, and staff described feeling valued and respected. A person said, “They [staff] are always on time. They take me to hospital appointments and give me support”.

Staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriately and followed infection control procedures. Training was completed annually, and staff described using gloves, aprons, and masks consistently. People confirmed, “They [staff] wear PPE: a mask, an apron and gloves, and their Identity badge”.

People received medicines safely, with clear care records and regular audits. Staff had been trained and followed the 7 Rs of medication administration right patient, right medication, right dose, right route, right time, right reason, right documentation and used electronic MARs to record topical medication. A person said, “Staff sort my medication. They give me a little blue cup and give me my medicines”.