Alison House

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

The last rating for this key question was good. At this assessment the rating remained good.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

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.

There was a friendly and welcoming atmosphere in the service. Relatives and people using the service confirmed this, as did professionals who worked alongside the service.

There was a positive culture at the service which placed the needs of people using the service at the heart of all decisions.

Staff liked working for the organisation and would recommend it as a place to work.

A senior manager told us the organisation had systems to help prevent closed cultures. These included encouraging staff to speak up, involving senior leaders with local staff meetings and acting swiftly to address any issues as they arose.

The provider’s own audits highlighted issues in the recent past with the management of the service. These included staff not being up to date with training; some support plans needed updating and building checks had not been completed with the regularity required.

The provider had taken a proactive approach to manage these areas where internal systems were not of the quality they expected. By the time of the assessment, the majority of actions had been completed.

There was an action plan to focus management attention on outstanding tasks, which was still being worked through. We discussed the issues we identified during the assessment with the management team. They started to take action to address these.

Staff meetings took place regularly and these covered issues relevant to the team.

The organisation had visible senior managers. They visited the services to meet with people and staff.

The provider supported people using the service, staff and other stakeholders to speak up through supervision, team meetings, meetings with senior managers and the annual survey.

The provider had a number of benefits to support staff working for the services. There was a flexible work policy; opportunities to have a varied hours contract; access to an employee assistance programme and free membership to an online exercise programme.

The provider ensured staff with disabilities had additional support at work and there was a programme to support staff returning to work. Staff roles as carers and parents were acknowledged and there were mental health first aiders to support staff at work.

The recruitment and human resources procedures ensured staff were not discriminated against. Staff were required to undertake training about equality and diversity as well as unconscious bias. The company values included an expectation that staff supported and respected each other.

Staff told us the organisation was supportive, and they enjoyed working at Alison House.

The provider’s governance systems had not always been effective. For example, notifications had not always been sent to CQC in a timely manner and learning from incidents had not always been shared with staff across services. Following our visit to the service, the provider started to make improvements in these areas.

The provider was implementing a new care recording system, and this task required significant management input to ensure that the system met the needs of the service. The implementation of this new system was part of the planning for the future of the organisation.

The provider was working with the implementation team to ensure that records and reports were relevant and concise. Building checks were also now recorded on the system which meant improved management oversight of these critical tasks.

The service was reviewing its medicines policy and administration to cater for the specific requirements of a respite service. This was finalised following the assessment process and the provider intended to review its effectiveness going forward.

The provider had effective systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. Staff and managers at all levels carried out a range of audits and checks to make sure people received good quality care and risks were being appropriately managed.

Commissioners carried out their own audits and checks to ensure they were happy with the care provided to their residents.

As a respite service the staff worked in partnership with external professionals as well as family members.

One social care professional told us, “From my experience in working with the service, the service demonstrates a multi-disciplinary team approach. For example, they would request for up to date information about person’s health and wellbeing. They also arrange multi-disciplinary team meetings when needed.“

The provider promoted a learning culture across this and their other services.

The provider had commissioned the support of an external agency to gain the views of people using the services and their family members. Responses to the recent survey were small, but feedback was positive. The service intended to restart coffee mornings at the service this autumn, and we saw feedback collected from family members which reinforced what they had told us, that they thought the service was of good quality and staff were kind and caring.

Staff were supported to develop their skills and take part in training as well as external qualifications. Staff took part in team and individual meetings with managers.

The provider ensured that staff from other services carried out audits at this service to ensure learning was shared; staff understood the challenges of the range of services run by the provider and shared ideas and learning took place across the organisation.

The provider also shared information about good practice and legislation.