Alexandra House

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

Safeguarding processes were followed, and staff were aware of reporting systems. People were supported to make choices that balanced risks of harm with positive choices about their lives. There were enough staff to deliver safe care that promotes choice, control, and individual wellbeing.

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.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us they were safe living at Alexandra House. One person told us, ‘’I feel safe, I talk to most people, we are a pleasant group.’’ Another person said, ‘’I feel very safe here.’’

Staff were aware of the safeguarding processes and the actions they had to take to keep people safe from harm. Comments included, ’’Risk assessments are all on our app/devices and in the care plans. We discuss risks at handover meetings and any changes are mentioned then so that is good’’ , ‘’If I saw any abuse I would go to my manager on shift and report it. There are posters that guide us as well. All the training is helpful’’ and ‘’If I suspected any abuse, I would report it to the manager. Although I’ve not had to.’’ Staff knew who to contact outside of the home to raise concerns.

People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff, they received care and support in line with their assessed needs. We observed kind and respectful interactions between people and staff.

Safeguarding procedures were robust. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through the Mental Capacity Act 2005 application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people lived with restrictions to help keep them safe, this was done in line with legislation. Where necessary and people had DoLS authorisations in place. Systems were used to monitor the DoLS being applied for and request for renewal of these applications when necessary. Safeguarding concerns were reported to the local authority in line with the providers policy.

People were involved in shaping their care plans which included managing and minimising risks where possible. One person told us, ‘’I do feel safe here. They do listen to me.’’ Another person said, ‘’They do listen to me; they are very good. I can manage most things myself but if I need any help, they will always help me.’’

Staff knew people well. Staff told us how they supported people in distress, by providing them with verbal reassurance, watching the person’s body language and remaining calm while supporting them. Comments included, ‘’We know all the residents well and how they like their care given’’ , ‘’I know about resident’s risk assessments, they are all in the care plans and we also discuss any changes at the 10 at 10 meeting’’ and ‘’I know all of the residents well.’’

We observed staff working in safe way, in particular when supporting people to move around the home and when eating their meal.

Risk assessments were person-centred, proportionate, and regularly reviewed with the person. Alexandra House worked well with outside contractors to ensure safety of people when accessing activities in the community. The risks assessed included medication taken by people and any special dietary needs. Staff were able to access people’s care plans and risk assessments on the electronic system used at Alexandra House. This included a summary of risks for the person, their medical and care needs on the front page. This meant that staff had quick access to people’s records to enable them to provide care.

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

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People and their relatives were positive about the staff of Alexandra House. One relative told us, “I’m extremely happy with the home, I don’t have any concerns at all.’’ Comments from people included, ‘’The staff do come and see me when I need them, they are around all the time’’ , ‘’They are so patient; they help me when I need it‘’ and ‘’The staff are kind to me, if I need them I use the button to call them, there are always enough staff and they check on me all the time.’’

Staff received training appropriate and relevant to their role. Staff told us they had regular supervisions. One staff member told us, “Yes, I get supervision about every 2-3 months. My manager does them, they are helpful, and they do listen. I have been offered specialist dementia training. They always offer training.’’ Another staff member said, ‘’I do have regular supervisions, normally every 2-3 months, they are good, and they do listen to us. If we are worried about anything they will help and support us, it works well. I do find the supervisions helpful; all things can be changed if you just discuss it such as working hours and days etc.’’

Staff did not appear rushed, they had time to spend with people. Staff attended people when they requested, either by using their call bell or by asking them for help.

Safe recruitment practices were in place. Staff were required to complete Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) and reference checks prior to commencing employment in the service. DBS checks are important because they alert employers to individuals who are barred from working with people who receive a regulated activity. Staff were provided with regular supervisions and appraisals. The registered manager told us some staff needed additional support when they first started at Alexandra House, especially if they were new to care. This was provided through additional supervisions and guidance to staff until it was no longer required. Staff received training appropriate and relevant to their role. The registered manager told us there was always additional training being offered to staff. An example was specialised staff training to support people if they were emotionally distressed.

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.