London Borough of Ealing Reablement Service

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 received a safe service and suitable numbers of appropriately recruited staff were employed to meet their needs. This meant people were supported to live safely. The registered manager and staff assessed, monitored, and recorded any risks to people, as required. Accidents, incidents, and safeguarding concerns were reported, investigated, and recorded appropriately. Staff were trained to prompt and support people to take their medicines, if required. Infection control procedures were followed.

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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us that they were involved in the reablement decision-making process from start to finish, had full involvement with all the healthcare professionals involved who followed an integrated health improvement and independence pathway. They felt safe and confident using the systems of care and felt they worked really well. One person said, “Helping me to feel confident to make decisions going forward, and doing things for myself is the whole point and this is what they do so well.” Another person told us, “I couldn’t have made the progress I have without them [Staff] and all the healthcare professionals involved."

The staff and management team said the systems and pathways in place enabled an integrated care approach to the care and support provided, enabling people to achieve their goal of living as independently as possible by being given the right support, at the right time. This was tracked, monitored, and reviewed regularly to maintain the right support and input from staff and other healthcare professionals.

Feedback from partners was consistently positive about the standard and quality of care provided that was enabled by collective partner integration and robust monitoring processes and systems. Partner agencies had no concerns about how the service was run, and worked with them.

People said they felt very safe using the service and said they received the standard of care they required. People told us staff who supported them knew how to keep them safe. One person said, “Staff are very nice, and I get everything I need.” Another person added, “I feel very safe with the staff, they turn up on time and always treat me with respect.” People felt confident to raise any concerns they might have and knew how to do this if they did not feel safe. People and those important to them were supported to understand how to raise concerns when they did not feel safe. One person said, “Everyone is very helpful, and I know how to contact the office if I need to.”

The positive feedback from staff, and management team, demonstrated people received the standard of care they needed. The management team supported staff to safeguard people from the risk of abuse, and staff had received relevant, up to date training to achieve this. Staff understood how to recognise abuse, neglect, protect people from its different forms and to report any concerns to the management team. The registered manager understood their responsibility to refer safeguarding incidents to the relevant external agencies without delay, ensure they were fully investigated and to take appropriate proactive action to minimise the risk of similar incidents reoccurring. They told us they encouraged a culture at the service where people, relatives, and staff could raise concerns without fear about what might happen. Staff were aware of their duty to protect people from abuse and how and when to report any concerns they had to managers and staff. The registered manager had a clear understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and that it was only used when it was in the best interest of the person. Staff supported people to understand and manage risk. The provider, registered manager, and staff assessed and reviewed safety risks to people regularly, and made sure people and those important to them, were involved in making decisions about how they wished to be supported to stay safe. Care plans were clear and provided sufficient guidance to staff to keep people safe.

The provider's safeguarding policy and processes were in line with relevant legislation. Records demonstrated safeguarding concerns reported to the registered manager were recorded in detail and reported promptly to the relevant external agencies. The registered manager worked well with these agencies and acted in a timely way to make sure people were safeguarded and protected from further risk. People and those important to them were involved in this process and informed about what action would be taken to keep people safe.

People said they received a good standard of care. Any risks to people’s safety were managed well, without unnecessary restrictions. People said staff knew how to support them with known, acceptable risks and that they were involved in planning the care they received. One person said, “They help me to manage my life, and progress which is the whole point of the service."

The feedback from the management team and staff demonstrated risks to people were managed safely. Staff were given relevant training to help them keep people safe. This included any training regarding equipment used to support people, such as hoists to help people move and transfer safely. Staff understood risks posed to people and explained to us how they would reduce the risk of injury or harm. They also sourced experience, guidance, and dialogue from other healthcare professionals to keep people safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us there were enough, skilled, professional staff to support them. One person told us, “I generally have the same people coming who are all excellent, there on time, and do their jobs.” Another person added, “Great staff, those who visit me and in the office. Everyone is approachable and listens."

The staff duty rotas showed there were enough suitably deployed staff to meet people's needs safely. The provider and management team ensured that thorough pre-employment recruitment checks were completed prior to employment, to make sure that only staff deemed fit and suitable would be employed to support people using the service. This included checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) who provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Training records demonstrated that staff received relevant courses to support them to meet a range of people’s needs. Training was refreshed at regular intervals so that staff stayed up to date with current practice. Supervision and appraisal records demonstrated that staff had regular supervision meetings and an annual appraisal of their overall work performance with their line managers to support them in their role and to identify any further training or learning they might need. Staff were well supported by the management team during individual supervision, group meetings, and annual appraisals of their overall work performance. They were able to discuss their job roles in order to continuously learn and improve their working practice.

The management and staff feedback demonstrated there were enough staff to support people with their care and support needs. The registered manager, and management team reviewed staffing levels regularly to make sure there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff received regular, relevant training to support them in their roles and they said they were well supported by the management team to learn and continuously improve their working practices. Staff told us about the training they had received, how it helped them to deliver support and were knowledgeable about the areas they received training in. The registered manager told us the service staffing levels regularly reviewed to make sure there were always enough staff to meet people’s needs. There were systems in place for the provider to identify and monitor staff training requirements and ensure it remained relevant and up to date.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.