Dame Alice Court

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 reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Where staff reported accidents and incidents, leaders reviewed these and took action to reduce future risks. If people were at risk of falls, there was equipment in place to support people, following a robust assessment to help ensure they did not require medical attention.

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. People’s needs were assessed by the provider before they started using the service. In relation to care plans a staff member told us, “Care plans are in (people’s flats) but we also have them on (electronic devices). If something has changed, you will immediately know as the communication is really good.”

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. People told us they felt safe. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew who they could report concerns to internally and externally. A person said they feel, “Perfectly safe the people here are caring they are so good they help you but also help you be independent they are wonderful.”

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. The provider had carried out person centred risk assessments with people in areas such as their mobility, the support they needed to take their prescribed medicines and dietary needs. This meant risks people could experience were minimised. A person told us, “They discuss the care plan with me, they will always be checking on things.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Risk assessments had been carried out in relation to identifying any hazards in people’s homes. People did not raise any safety concerns to us about their environments. All staff we spoke with knew how to report any environmental concerns to people’s housing provider. A staff member said, “Any concerns about the environment I can report it and the managers are responsive.” People had access to safety equipment such as fall sensing mats and call pendants.

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. Staff had received training relevant to their roles. A staff member said, “Training is really good, we have annual updates to make sure we have a refresher.” Staff were recruited safely. There were systems in place to monitor staff care calls to ensure they were prompt and supported people for the length of time they were commissioned to deliver care. A person told us, “I have a pendent, when I press it, staff come quickly.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and were aware of the need to share concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Care records showed staff had supported people where required to maintain the cleanliness of their homes. Staff had received infection prevention and control training.

Where the provider ordered prescribed medicines on behalf of people, records showed they had not always received all of their prescribed medicines due to stocks running out. Leaders told us this was due to the GP not accepting earlier repeat prescription requests and delays people had experienced in waiting for their prescribed medicines to be delivered. Although there was evidence of staff identifying that people’s stock was running low, leaders auditing medicines, following up on repeat prescription requests, improvement was needed to ensure people always received their prescribed medicines safely. We signposted the provider to take action such as speaking to the GP practice manager or raising a safeguarding referral. However, staff had received training and competency assessments to administer medicines.