Hope Health Kare 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 people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 review and analysed to identify learning. The provider submitted appropriate notifications to CQC and the local authority following accidents and incidents.

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 received pre-assessment and referral information from social care professionals which were used to develop people’s care and support plans. The provider attended multi-disciplinary team meetings where people’s care and support were discussed to ensure consistency of approach and improved outcomes for people. A relative told us, “[I have] been impressed with all the care and certainly my family member is safe.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way for this to be achieved. Members of 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. We saw evidence the provider followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to review people’s capacity and understanding around receiving care and support. The provider involved social care professionals in these discussions. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. The provider had safeguarding and mental capacity act policies in place. The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). We found the service was working within the principles of the MCA. One person told us, “[I am] safe all the time [and I have] no worries at all.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Members of staff provided care to meet people’s needs which was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things which mattered to them. The provider had developed care plans and risk assessments for people which were person-centred and which identified how people wanted their care to be delivered. A member of staff told us, "I always check the most up-to-date care plans and risk assessments before each shift and before providing care to each person, to ensure I am supporting them according to their preferences and requirements. I also refer back to the care plan regularly throughout the day if anything changes or if I am unsure about the best way to assist someone. This helps me deliver care safely, consistently, and in a way which respects the person’s choices."

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 kept a record of service dates for equipment in people’s homes to ensure it was safe to use. The equipment was loaned to people through the local community equipment scheme. The provider used technology and electronic reporting to monitor and review the timeliness of care and support calls. The provider’s data showed 96% of care and support calls were completed on time.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care which met people’s individual needs. Members of staff were recruited safely. They were deployed effectively and people had consistent teams of people who supported them. Feedback from people confirmed members of staff were competent to deliver care, however there were some members of staff where their knowledge and skills were not as good as others. One person told us, “What [the provider] does is get new [members of staff] to shadow [existing members of staff] so if [the existing members of staff] are not good then it is passed on.” Another person said, “I think they are trained well.” A third person told us, “[Members of staff] have been trained by me. They are excellent. They did need some help.” A member of staff told us, "I have received specific training to support people with learning disabilities and autistic people, including communication techniques, visual aids or simplified language, and strategies to support sensory needs and support people safely. This helps me provide safe, person-centred care tailored to each individual."

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 had an infection prevention and control policy in place. Members of staff received training in to prevent and control infections and cross-contamination. Members of staff confirmed they had access to supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE). One member of staff told us, “Yes, I always have enough PPE whilst on shift, the field supervisor also supplies PPE when necessary. I've had training in infection prevention and control food hygiene and hand hygiene.” One person told us, “[I have] never seen them without PPE. I would not allow [members of staff not to use it] anyway.”

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Members of staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. Medicines were managed safely and people’s medication administration record (MAR) charts were completed appropriately and regularly audited and reviewed by a member of the management team. The provider had policies in place to manage the safe administration of medicines. Members of staff confirmed they knew what to do in the event of a medication error, "If a medication error occurs, it’s important to act quickly and follow the correct procedure. First, I would ensure the person’s safety by checking for any immediate harm and providing or seeking medical assistance if needed. Then, I would report the error immediately to a senior member of staff or manager and record it accurately in the appropriate documentation." A relative told us, “My [family member] does their own tablets using a blister pack but [members of staff] always check and record it.”