Walfinch Hampstead & Camden

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.The rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. This meant peoplewere safe and protected from avoidable harm.The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment.Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.The provider had taken action to ensure medicines were managed appropriately.

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.

There was a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Lessons were learnt to identify and embed good practice. A system was in place to report, record and monitor incidents and to help support people safely. The registered manager confirmed that there had been no accidents/incidents since the last inspection. However, the registered manager regular discussed accidents/incidents with staff in order to help ensure staff were familiar with their responsibilities and what action to take in such an event.

We spoke with staff who were clear about how to report concerns, record on the electronic system the provider used, and had confidence that the registered manager would address any concerns without delay. A member of staff told us, “[Management] would listen to me and take action.”

Staff were able to raise concerns outside of the management team to help prevent the development of a closed culture.

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. The provider carried out assessments of people’s needs prior to their package of care and support starting. This enabled them to meet people in their own homes.

Staff commented positively on the care plans used to support people. Staff also spoke confidently about the processes to report concerns and raise issues about people’s safety. They were also confident; their concerns would be listened to and acted upon by management.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, where safety was managed or monitored. Procedures were in place to help safeguard people from abuse and improper treatment. Staff knew how to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and received training to help ensure they were up to date with best practice guidance. Staff knew how to report concerns and said that they wouldn’t hesitate to do so.

Relatives told us they were confident people were safe in the presence of care staff and were well looked after. A relative said, “[My family member] is safe with care staff and I truly feel this way.” Another relative said, “I am confident [my family member] is well looked after and [they] are safe.”

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.

Systems to help identify, assess and plan for risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were in place and effective. Care plans identified risks which were discussed with people and relatives where appropriate when carrying out initial assessments and review processes.

Risk assessments were person centred. They included details of control measures to help mitigate risk and protect 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.

The registered manager carried out a risk assessment of people’s property during an initial assessment, including a check of the safety of any equipment in use, to identify any hazards such as slip and trip risks, or poor lighting. Where necessary, a risk assessment was completed to keep people and staff safe.

Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPS) were in place for each person. These provided details about people's mobility and medical conditions that could impact on their ability to leave their homes in the event of an emergency.

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.

Relatives told us staff arrived on time and stayed for the length of time agreed and carried out tasks as agreed. The provider used an electronic homecare monitoring system to plan and monitor care visits. This recorded care staff’ actual start and visit times to ensure they were adhered to, and people received their care as planned. The system promoted continuity of care by monitoring staff deployment.

Records showed that staff had received training in areas relevant to their roles. Staff received supervision sessions and on-site spot checks. This enabled management to monitor and discuss care staff’s role, performance and development. Policies and procedures were in place to help recruit staff safely. Checks on the suitability of potential staff were completed. These included obtaining references and checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). The DBS helps employers make safer recruitment decisions and help prevent unsuitable people from working in care services.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. Staff detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and were aware of the procedures to follow if any concerns had to be shared.

Staff followed infection control processes, including washing their hands, keeping people’s home’s clean and wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) where appropriate.

Staff had completed training about infection prevention and control. Staff said they had enough PPE.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. During this assessment, we found the provider had made improvements to medicines management. Effective medicines management systems were in place. Since the previous inspection, the service had introduced a new electronic system for monitoring medicines administration. We looked at a sample of Medicine Administration Records (MARs) and found these were completed fully indicating medicines were administered as prescribed.

People's medicine support needs were documented in their care plans. Staff received training to administer medicines to help ensure they had the appropriate knowledge and skills. Where people were prescribed medicines on a when required basis (PRN), there were appropriate protocols in place to advise staff on what circumstances and how to give these medicines.