The Alan Shearer Centre

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 assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good.

This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (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 a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learned to continually identify and embed good practice.

The provider responded to concerns and used feedback to improve care. Lessons learned were reviewed locally and through a monthly provider risk panel. Following concerns raised by a family member, the service reviewed practice and introduced changes to communication arrangements, medicines monitoring and equipment reviews.
 

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Staff worked with families and healthcare professionals to support safe and consistent care. Information was shared with staff, and professional advice was included in care plans. Staff developed communication videos and personalised transition information when supporting people moving on from the service.
 

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm, and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe and knew how to report concerns, with staff saying “I know how to proceed with a safeguarding, who to inform etc.”
Policies and procedures were in place to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Families were informed when safeguarding concerns arose. Safeguarding concerns were monitored through an organisational risk panel.
 

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive, and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Staff understood people's individual risks and supported them in ways that reflected their needs and preferences. Relatives told us staff recognised changes in mood and behaviour and adapted support appropriately. One relative said, "The service worked with wheelchair services to obtain specialist seating so risks could be managed, and [person] could continue to take part in activities that were important to [them]."
 

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.
The provider completed a range of environmental and safety checks. Fire extinguisher checks, emergency lighting checks, weekly flushing records, and monthly temperature monitoring had been completed. Window restrictors were in place where required.

We found some environmental monitoring records had not always been completed in line with the provider's schedule. This included shower-head sanitisation and Legionella monitoring. Some water temperatures exceeded expected levels; however, staff told us people could not independently access affected taps, and maintenance action was being taken. These issues had not resulted in harm, but improvements were needed to strengthen oversight of environmental monitoring.
 

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled, and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision, and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The staff team had worked at the service for many years, which helped provide consistent care for people. One staff member told us, "We have a strong, supportive and experienced team." Relatives consistently described staff as knowledgeable and experienced. Staff worked together to meet people's needs safely and shared their knowledge with colleagues to support consistent care.

Staff completed Oliver McGowan training, sensory bus experiences and Makaton training to improve their understanding of people's experiences and needs. One staff member said, "I found this very enlightening and thought-provoking."
 

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The environment was visibly clean, and we found no significant infection prevention and control concerns during our visit. A shower chair showed signs of wear and had already been referred for replacement following professional review.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities, and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

The service responded appropriately when concerns were raised regarding medicines arrangements. Communication and recording systems were strengthened to improve oversight and information sharing between families and the service.