ALS Support Limited t/a ALS Support

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 75 (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.

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 were up to date with safeguarding training and could demonstrate they understood how to raise safeguarding concerns. The provider had systems in place to ensure any safeguarding concerns were monitored. There was an up-to-date safeguarding policy.

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 demonstrated a good understanding of how people's risks should be managed and how to involve people and their family members in risk management. This was demonstrated in the risk assessment documentation. People had person centred risk assessments in place with guidance to support staff on how to manage risks. Risk assessments were reviewed regularly.

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. The service valued their staff and ensured they received regular, meaningful supervisions and appraisals. Feedback from family members was positive, comments included, “We know the staff well, they are lovely people,” and “they are on time, rarely late and if they are they will let us know.” Although most staff had been trained appropriately and were up to date with training. We found one staff member was out of date with mandatory training. Following our inspection, we received evidence which confirmed the staff member had completed their training.

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.