Forest Homecare Suffolk

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

People were safe and protected from harm, procedures in place meant risks were managed well. There were enough staff who were skilled to provide care and support. People received medicines as prescribed. Lessons were learnt from events within the service. Infection prevention and control measures were robust.

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.

Accidents and incidents were recorded in people’s records. For example, a person had a potentially dangerous piece of equipment that was suitably disposed of. Care plans were updated where necessary following any incident. Events were analysed in order to identify themes and trends. People felt the organisation listened to their views on safety. A relative gave an example of where medicines management had improved based upon their feedback. Stating, "Things have improved greatly and the manager has rectified the issues that I had."

There was evidence to show that the provider understood reflective practice to learn from events and put in place actions that were then embedded. For example, following our last inspection changes have been made and sustained. The provider was clear that lessons learnt included the improvement of staff training and development along with appointing a manager who is located at the branch.

The provider had been transparent with the people using the service about the necessary improvements made. There was a culture of learning, evaluating and improvement.

Where appropriate people’s families were involved and informed of developments and changes. For example, a relative explained how care staff had arranged for handrails to be placed by their relative’s bed to keep them safe. A different person told us, “I wasn’t well one day recently and the carer called for an ambulance, I felt really poorly, the carer phoned the office to inform them and another senior carer came out to see me and also waited until the ambulance came, I was not left by myself .” This demonstrates that the agency is not working in isolation, but accessing other services in a timely way for people.

Staff worked well with external professionals, sharing information to ensure people’s care needs were met. For example, medical professionals and other social care support.

Feedback received during the assessment was positive. External partners were complimentary about the improvements made within the service in particular the commitment to resolving issues and concerns.

People’s needs, and care requirements were detailed within their care plans and risk assessments. An electronic care planning system meant records and information were up to date and could be immediately adapted.

People told us they felt safe with the care they received from Forest Homecare Suffolk. A person told us, “They are good girls and are very kind, they look after me well and are so helpful, nothing is too much trouble, I have always felt safe with my girls.” A relative told us, “Mum feels very safe as she has got to know her carers well and they engage well with her, chatting and involving her with decisions.” People and their relatives felt happy to raise concerns with any of the staff or the office staff if needed.

Staff knew how to ensure people were protected from harm and abuse. One staff member was able to recount a recent incident of keeping someone safe from harm. They told us how they would raise concerns both within the service and outside. Staff were confident the registered manager would follow up any concerns and make the necessary referrals. Staff understood how to ensure people’s rights were fully respected and had received training in safeguarding, dignity, and respect. The registered manager was clear about the process to follow to ensure people were protected and concerns were reported and investigated without delay. A member of staff told us, “I raise concerns immediately if I am not happy about something and management action accordingly and keep me informed as necessary if they are able.”

Safeguarding procedures were robust; a policy was in place and staff knew the correct reporting procedures. Staff had received safeguarding training and in addition to this there were frequent reminders on the electronic systems and through emails and meetings. Records showed safeguarding concerns were logged, correctly followed up and outcome sought where possible. Feedback received during planning confirmed the service worked well with their safeguarding partners.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe, and their risks were assessed and planned for. One person told us, “I have a few female carers that rotate, and I trust them all.” People and their relatives where appropriate felt involved in planning for their needs in relation to risks and keeping safe.

Staff told us they understood people’s risks and how to keep them safe. People had detailed and robust assessments for their individual risks, such as, choking, falls and where equipment was used to support movement. Risks to staff were assessed and managed. One member of staff told us, “Individual care plans state their risk and what to avoid with the service users.” Another told us, “Care plans highlight risks on an individual basis as all clients are different.”

People’s risks were assessed before the service commenced. Risk assessments were updated regularly or as things changed. An electronic care planning system meant updates could be made instantly, this meant staff were referring to the most up to date information about people. All these measures contributed to robust safety with the management of risk.

People told us staff worked in a safe way. Everyone we spoke with was confident staff were trained and had made a thorough assessment of their home environment.

Ensuring a safe environment was critical within the service. Staff told us they were properly trained, and this included lone worker training. People and staff had access to support via the telephone when they needed including out of normal working hours.

Assessments were carried out to ensure staff had a safe working environment in people’s homes. Equipment checks were maintained where it was used, and consideration had been given to emergency situations such as fire or utilities failure. Records confirmed all people using the service had the necessary risk assessments and guidance for staff in place.

People and their relatives told us there were enough staff working at the service. One person said, “They are usually on time and never cut the call short.” People were supported by a regular team of staff who knew them well and understood their needs. The manager told us keeping the same staff with people where possible was always their goal. People told us continuity of staff was important. One person told us how important this was to them and said, “I am safe as I have regular carers.”

Staff received the training and supervision to ensure they worked within the values of Forest Homecare Suffolk. The service values were threaded through the training and support staff received. All staff had completed tier one of the Oliver McGowan training. Tier 2, the lived experience had been accessed by some staff and was being planned for others. Staff told us they had received a wide variety of training to be able to carry out their role effectively. A member of staff told us, “I am up to date with all mandatory training including safeguarding and have just done the GERT. (These are simulation suits that create the experience of old age and the impairments of an older person).” Another staff member said, “I receive regular training, supervision and appraisal which supports the development and improvement of services.”

Staffing numbers had been planned to meet people’s needs and provide care and support safely. Continual assessment was carried out to balance the staff numbers with care hours available to be able to support people in their own homes. Training records showed staff were up to date with training and attended regular refresher training to ensure their knowledge and skills were kept updated. Supervision and appraisal records confirmed staff received the support they needed to deliver safe care. Staff were recruited safely, and recruitment records reflected this. Procedures were in place to ensure the required checks were carried out on staff before they commenced their employment. This included enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for adults. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the police national computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

People and their relatives told us the staff worked in a clean and organised way; they did not have concerns about staffing in terms of infection control. People confirmed staff wore their personal protective equipment (PPE) when needed.

Infection prevention and control procedures were robust, underpinned by a comprehensive policy. Staff had access to plentiful supplies of PPE. One staff member said, “We have full PPE which is readily available for us to collect from the office. I always make sure I have a good supply.” Adherence to the infection control policy was observed during monitoring checks in the community where staff demonstrated how to work in a safe and clean way in people’s homes.

Everyone was responsible for infection prevention and control; staff had received training with regular updates. Due to the pandemic in recent years infection prevention had become more in depth, training and procedures were more robust.

People received their medicines as prescribed. There were safe procedures in place for ordering, storage, and administration of medicines. People were confident they received their medicines on time and records reflected this.

Staff worked safely to ensure people had their medicines on time, visits were scheduled in line with medicine requirements. Staff received training, both theory and practical together with ongoing checks to ensure safe practices. Records confirmed this had taken place.

Safe procedures were in place for the administration of medicines. This included medicines taken occasionally and those which had required stricter handling as required by law. There was detailed and robust policies and procedures in place and the service were complying with it.