Alpine House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

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

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 told us people were at the centre of their care. People and relatives told us they had regular staff who knew them well. A relative told us, “I’ve been able to discuss with the carers how they do some things, made minor changes, but with no need to go through management; the care staff want to help me to the best of their ability.” Another relative told us, “They (staff) do things how (person’s name) like them done, (person’s name) feels able to tell them anything and they will try and sort anything out.” A third relative told us, “We have had the service for two years, so the care plan probably needs updating, although it’s been two years of working together with no concerns, we are very satisfied.”

There were some inconsistencies in people’s records. For example, a person’s care records stated they had sore skin at a stage that would be reportable as a safeguarding concern. When we asked the registered manager about this, they told us the person no longer had sore skin, but the care records had not been updated to reflect this. Some moving and handling records were not personalised. The arrangements for the management of care records and risk assessments were not always robust, and this meant there was a risk that some care needs may not be identified and met. The registered manager did not share all the care records with us until after we had completed our feedback.

Staff told us they reported any changes in people’s care needs to the registered manager, and it was acted on promptly. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s support needs and preferences.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities. People had access to local health and care services. The registered manager told us they made referrals for additional support and reviews for people appropriately.

Relatives told us staff shared concerns with them about people’s health needs. A relative told us, “They are really good at timekeeping, and they keep me up to date, for example they tell me of health issue at an early stage, so I can contact the district nurse before there’s a problem.”

Staff confirmed people’s needs were monitored at each visit and they worked with the registered manager to share concerns and seek advice with the required professionals.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People told us they had received a copy of their care plan. Staff understood people’s individual methods of communicating and care plans were in place which gave staff some guidance on helping people express their views.

The provider explained the different ways they had made information accessible to people and how they ensured people and staff were able to communicate effectively. They told us how they had printed and laminated memory photos for a person living with dementia. They also gave examples of how they spent time with people to help and understand letters and communication about hospital appointments. A staff member told us they had helped a person set up a video call with their relative so they could keep in contact.

The provider had some systems in place for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. There was a complaints policy in place and people and their families were able to make complaints and raise concerns about their care and support. The provider’s audits of complaints for the last 12 months identified 2 complaints that had been dealt with directly through their own system. The registered manager had responded to concerns raised by stakeholders, and detailed investigation reports were available. However, these rarely identified any learning for the organisation. The local authority shared information with us about 1 complaint but the provider told us they had never been made aware of the concern. The provider’s system recorded formal complaints. Low-level issues and concerns were not recorded and analysed as part of their system or used as part of an opportunity to show how these had been used to drive improvement.

People and their relatives told us they knew how to raise a complaint or feedback any concerns they had with the service provided. One person said, “I haven’t needed to contact the office about anything, but wouldn’t have any problems doing so.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People and their relatives told us the provider was flexible and made changes to the care when required. A relative told us, “They once readily accommodated a request for a radical change of visit time, to enable me to take (person’s name) to a church service.”

Staff told us they had contacted external health and social care professionals when needed to ensure people had access to the required care and treatment to meet their changing needs.

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff completed training in equality and diversity, and had access to policies relating to equality, diversity and inclusion. This enabled staff to understand people’s diverse needs and respond in a way that provided positive outcomes.

People were supported by staff to be involved in special celebrations throughout the year such as birthdays, Easter and Diwali.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The provider was providing end of life care to some people at the time of the inspection. Staff had received training that included how to support people in a dignified way in line with their preferences at this time of their lives.