Alpenbest

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 69 (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.

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 did not always share concerns quickly and appropriately.

Safeguarding adults’ and childrens’ policies and procedures were in place. However, these had not been updated to include details about how to refer concerns to the local authority safeguarding team. The management team assured us this would be done.

Staff were aware of their role and responsibility to safeguard people from avoidable harm. On the whole records were maintained of any concerns raised. This included details of the concern and lessons learned. However, we saw that a complaint had been raised that indicated an allegation of possible abuse and this had not been appropriately reported to the local authority to ensure it could be adequately investigated. The manager told us this was an oversight and they would ensure it was retrospectively reported.

Nevertheless, feedback from a partner agency told us, “Alpenbest care are thorough when conducting investigations and responding to enquiries.” People felt safe and well cared for by staff at Alpenbest. One relative told us, “It’s very safe because she has had the same carer`s for many years and they get on well.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. However, staff did not always capture all information to enable staff to provide care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

On the whole care records contained detailed information about risks to people’s safety and we saw comprehensive risk assessments were in place regarding moving and handling, mobility and skin integrity. Information about people’s long-term conditions were captured in their care records. However, we found some of the information relating to long term conditions was standardised and had not been tailored to the individual. Therefore, there was a risk that staff would not know how to support a person safely and free from pain with conditions such as arthritis. We also saw stock phrasing being used in people’s care plans regarding emergency evacuation procedures which did not reflect the needs of the individual. The management team took on board this feedback and told us they would update their care records.

Care workers were aware of the importance of protecting people and minimising risks to their health and welfare. Staff worked with other health and social care professionals to support people’s needs. A healthcare professional working with staff told us, “The staff do their best to provide succinct information when reporting issues and respond in a timely manner which improves outcomes for the people involved and minimises unnecessary delays.” People felt staff supported them to stay safe. They told us staff provided support and supervision with moving and handling, their mobility and regarding skin integrity in order to maintain a person’s safety and welfare. Comments from people said, “She is there for my safety.” “She is safe because we have continuity of carers.”

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

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.

Safe recruitment practices were in place to ensure suitable staff were employed. A comprehensive induction and shadowing process was in place to ensure staff were knowledgeable and confident in their role before lone working. Support structures were in place to ensure staff remained supported throughout their employment, including regular supervisions, annual appraisals and a mentoring scheme.

Staff completed regular training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to undertake their role. This included a mix of face to face training and elearning. The provider had an inhouse training team who were able to provide bespoke training according to staff’s needs. Staff felt well supported in their role. Comments from staff included, “I have a very good immediate manager. They support me 100%,” “There are plenty of opportunities at Alpenbest to learn and develop my skills and knowledge.”

Systems were in place to ensure there were enough staff employed who were being allocated appropriately to meet people’s needs. We saw calls were scheduled and planned well. People received support on time and staff stayed the required length of time to meet people’s needs. People confirmed this, and confirmed they received support from a consistent team of care workers. Comments from people and relatives included, “I get the same carers, which is great.” “They turn up on time and stay with him all the time, chatting, doing their work and cheering him up.”

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.