Austen Allen Homecare – Gravesham

“Key findings We carried out this assessment between 15 July to 24 July 2026. We visited the office on 15 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.”

“The service had systems in place to safeguard people from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff understood safeguarding responsibilities and were able to explain how they would identify and report concerns. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of incident reporting procedures and told us they would escalate concerns appropriately and seek emergency assistance where required.”

“Risks to people were assessed and managed. Risk assessments reflected people's individual circumstances and provided clear guidance for staff regarding identified risks. Records reviewed addressed risks associated with mobility, skin integrity, nutrition, medicines, behaviour and health conditions. Staff understood people's risks and were able to describe how they supported people safely whilst promoting independence.”

“People received support from staff who had undertaken mandatory and role-specific training. Training compliance was monitored through regular audits and management oversight. Where training became overdue, action was taken to ensure completion and managers monitored compliance closely. Staff told us they received the training they needed to carry out their roles safely and effectively.”

“Medicines were managed safely. Medication records reviewed clearly described the support people required, allergy information, storage arrangements and responsibilities for ordering and disposing of medicines. Medication audits identified issues and managers acted where improvements were required. Staff were confident supporting people with medicines and knew when to seek guidance from managers.”

“Care plans were person-centred and provided clear guidance regarding how people wished to be supported. Records reflected people's communication needs, preferences, routines and outcomes. Whilst some care plans contained repetitive wording and minor recording inconsistencies, these did not impact on the safe delivery of care. Records promoted independence and reflected what people could do for themselves as well as areas where support was required.”

“We checked and found that staff and management worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) where needed. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice control and freedom over their lives.”

“Staff knew people well and understood their individual needs. People, relatives and staff consistently told us the service provided continuity of care through regular carers who had developed positive relationships with the people they supported. This enabled staff to recognise changes in people's wellbeing and respond appropriately.”

“The service had systems in place to monitor quality and safety. Audits reviewed medicines, accidents, incidents, complaints and safeguarding concerns. Records demonstrated managers identified issues, investigated concerns, analysed trends and implemented learning. We saw evidence of safeguarding concerns being…”