Avant Healthcare Services 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 At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. People received safe care and treatment. Risks to their safety and wellbeing were assessed and planned for. There were enough staff and they were suitably trained to provide safe care. The provider had systems to learn when things went wrong and to improve the service. People received their medicines in a safe way and as prescribed. The provider worked closely with other professionals to help ensure safe transitions between services.

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 effective systems for learning when things went wrong. People using the service and their relatives told us the provider engaged with them, apologised and sought their feedback when dealing with accidents, incidents and complaints. The staff recorded all adverse events and reported these to the management team. These were investigated. When needed, the provider had made changes to the service, including updating people’s care plans, training staff and liaising with other professionals. The managers analysed things that had gone wrong and the investigations into these. They had identified themes and learning for staff. They shared feedback with staff through additional training, meetings and written communication. They also shared learning from the provider’s other branches to help improve staff practice and understanding.

The provider supported people with transitions and safe pathways. They worked closely with other professionals to make sure information was shared and people received consistent care. The agency supported a number of children and young people. Their family members told us the staff worked with schools and colleges. Care plans for both adults and children included information about their communication and healthcare needs. This could be used to share with other services, including hospitals and emergency services if needed. External professionals told us the communication from the agency was good. One professional explained they carried out assessments for people regarding equipment and skills. They told us the agency ensured a senior member of staff was present when this happened. They told us, ‘’This has a positive outcome and, if any issues arise during the visit, these can be resolved quickly and efficiently by us working together.’’

There were systems to help safeguard people from abuse and mistreatment. Information about procedures for dealing with abuse was shared with staff and people using the service. People and their relatives told us they felt safe. Their comments included, ‘’I know [person] is happy and safe with the agency. I feel confident [they] would speak up if not’’ and ‘’[Care worker] always notices if something is not right and [they] alert us. This is great and gives us confidence.’’ Some people were supported by staff from the agency with shopping. They and their relatives told us there were robust systems for handling money and sharing receipts. People, including those unable to make decisions for themselves, had as much freedom, choice and control over their lives as possible because staff managed risks to minimise restrictions. The staff undertook training about safeguarding. The provider tested their knowledge and discussed this with them at regular intervals. The provider had worked closely with the safeguarding authority and others to report and investigate abuse and to put in place systems to help protect people. Representatives of the safeguarding authority told us they felt work with the agency was positive following a recent investigation. Their comments included, ‘’[Avant] took all appropriate actions. We could see the agency took a serious approach to the concern. They conducted an internal investigation and collated all the relevant information. The evidence trail was really helpful.’’

Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing had been assessed and planned for. The assessments were detailed, included person-centred information, involved the views of the person and others and included a risk management plan. Assessments were regularly reviewed and updated. The provider liaised with other professionals, such as therapists and experts in managing behaviour that challenged, when needed to help make sure risk assessments and plans were in line with best practice. Staff could recognise signs when people experienced emotional distress and knew how to support them to minimise the need to restrict their freedom to keep them safe.

The provider assessed people’s home environments to identify any risks within these for the person or staff. They looked at fire safety and equipment as part of these assessments. They liaised with people’s families and others when needed, to discuss any concerns they identified and how these could be resolved.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to keep them safe. People using the service and their relatives told us they were usually cared for by the same regular care workers, that they arrived on time and they stayed the agreed length of time. Their comments included, ‘’We have the same carer all the time’’, ‘’The carers have been fantastic and totally understand as they are the same people’’ and ‘’They arrive on time and let me know if they are going to be later.’’ The agency tried to match care workers with the right skills, knowledge and personalities to care for each person. People and their relatives told us the agency had been quick to respond when this did not work out, changing care workers for them. The agency used a system of electronic call monitoring to help track when care workers arrived and how long they stayed at each visit. The provider carried out their own analysis of this and took action when things went wrong. We reviewed data for the month before our assessment and found that there was good compliance with the timing of planned visits. There were systems to help make sure staff were suitable when they were recruited. These included checks at recruitment stage, an induction and assessments of staff competencies and skills. Staff took part in a range of training and were given additional regular learning opportunities. This helped to make sure they were suitable to provide effective and safe care. Staff recruitment and induction training processes promoted safety. Staff knew how to take into account people’s individual needs, wishes and goals.

There were systems to help ensure infection prevention and control. People using the service and their relatives told us care workers always washed their hands and wore protective clothing, such as gloves and aprons, when needed. The staff undertook training around infection prevention and control. Managers tested their knowledge and discussed the importance of this with them. The agency carried out spot checks to observe staff caring for people. These included checks about cleanliness and whether staff followed procedures.

People received their medicines in a safe way and as prescribed. People received support from staff to make their own decisions about medicines wherever possible. There were clear procedures which reflected best practice and staff undertook relevant training and competency assessments. The provider assessed risks associated with people’s medicines. When staff were responsible for supporting people with these, the agency had created care plans and staff kept records to show when they had administered medicines and any issues with this. Managers carried out regular audits and checks of medicines records. We saw that any medicines related incidents had been investigated and followed up with additional staff training and guidance when needed.