Anco Care 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

All quality statements in this key question were reviewed. There was limited evidence available due to only 1 person receiving support. Processes were in place to keep the person safe from the risk of abuse, follow up appropriately on accidents and incidents, support transitions between services, assess any equipment and environment concerns. These processes had not yet been tested so we could not review their effectiveness. Processes were in place to assess and monitor known risks and ensure safe medicines practices. These needed to be embedded into practice over time. There was 1 member of care staff, who was also the company director, so a judgement about support to care staff could not be made.

This service scored 28 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

No incidents or accidents had occurred since the person started to receive support. Processes were in place to ensure accidents and incidents could be recorded and followed up. These needed to be tested out and embedded into practice.

The person had not moved between different services since support started. A ‘care passport’ included relevant information to share with medical staff in the event of a hospital admission. This would help ensure continuity of care. Processes were in place but needed to be tested out and embedded into practice.

Safeguarding processes were in place, for example, a tracker to log any safeguarding events. No safeguarding concerns had arisen since the person started to receive support. The person told us they received good support and felt safe. Templates were in place to assess people’s mental capacity and support decision making in people’s best interests where needed. The registered manager was aware of safeguarding and mental capacity assessment processes, these needed to be embedded into practice over time.

Risks to the person’s care were assessed, monitored and reviewed. There were a range of risk assessments used to ensure staff knew about the person’s risks and how to provide care which reduced these as far as possible. For example, how to support health conditions or ensure a person moved around safely. There were limited risks to review as part of this assessment and processes needed to be embedded over time.

The person’s home was assessed for any potential safety risks, for example, electrical hazards or access issues. The provider was not responsible for maintaining any equipment at the time of assessment. Processes needed to be embedded into practice to ensure their effectiveness over time.

There was 1 staff member at the time of assessment who undertook all of the care visits. They were also the company director. The person receiving support provided positive feedback about the care they received. Safe recruitment practices were followed. Staff training was up to date. Processes to support staff, for example team meetings and regular supervision, were in place and needed to be embedded into practice over time.

Staff received training in infection prevention and control and spot checks were undertaken to check staff practice. Daily records completed after each care visit showed staff washed their hands and used personal protective equipment, for example, gloves and aprons, when needed.

There was limited evidence available at the time of assessment as medicine support had only been provided for a short time. Records showed processes were in place to support the person safely with their medicines. An electronic system was used to record medicines administration, this was overseen by the registered manager including regular audits. Processes needed to be embedded into practice and sustained over time.