Precision Home Care Ltd

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 66 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service listened to any concerns about safety and investigated where necessary. Lessons were learnt to minimise the risk of a reoccurrence. For example, where people had experienced falls, the registered manager had documented what actions had been taken and any learning to improve people’s safety.

The service 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 service ensured relevant information was shared with other health professionals when required to support people’s needs.

The service worked with people and those important to them to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety. At the time of the assessment, the service had not needed to raise any safeguarding notifications. However, a safeguarding policy was in place for staff to follow and staff had completed safeguarding training.

Staff worked with people to understand and manage risks. People told us they felt safe when being supported. However, we found people’s risk assessment documentation had not been updated as their needs changed. This meant staff did not always have accurate guidance about how to manage and mitigate health risks. The registered manager responded promptly to our feedback, reviewing the relevant risk assessments to ensure they were accurate.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Environmental risk assessments were completed for each person to identify any potential hazards and minimise the risks to people and staff.

The service made sure there were enough experienced staff available to provide support. People and those important to them spoke positively about the consistency of their support and the positive impact this had on the continuity of people’s care. However, the service’s processes for supporting staff were not robust. Not all recruitment checks were completed in line with the service’s own recruitment policy and there was a lack of staff induction documentation to evidence what was included. Supervision records were in place; however, these lacked detail. At the time of the assessment, the service was small and the registered manager worked alongside 1 member of staff to provide people’s care. Following our feedback, the registered manager told us they had reviewed their recruitment, induction and supervision processes immediately and were in the process of making improvements to documentation.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. The service had an infection prevention and control policy in place and staff had completed relevant training to support their understanding of good hygiene practices.

The service involved people and those important to them in planning how they would like to be supported with their medicines. Staff checked people’s medicines and treatments were safe and met their needs. However, we found people’s medicines administration forms did not always contain all relevant information. For example, where changes had been made following consultation with the GP, the administration forms did not always contain clear information about the medicine’s strength and dosage. Following our feedback, the registered manager told us they had implemented electronic medicines administration recording to ensure forms were more legible and easy to monitor.