Alvina Lodge

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.

The last rating for this service was good. At this assessment, the rating 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.

There were systems to help learn from accidents, incidents and complaints. We saw adverse events were reported and investigated. The management team discussed these with people using the service when appropriate. The staff team had opportunities to discuss these and learn from each other to share good practice. The provider involved people using the service in learning when they had been involved in incidents. They supported people to understand about appropriate conduct and supported them to develop strategies to manage difficult situations in a positive way. People using the service confirmed this and explained they had guidance and support to help them manage their emotions, mental wellbeing and to learn from things that had gone wrong.

There were suitable systems to support people who transition between services. The provider had worked closely with community mental health teams and hospital staff to assess people’s needs to enable an appropriate transition when moving to the service. They continued to work with these professionals to monitor people’s needs and support them to access other services. A professional told us, “I have had the opportunity to work with [the registered manager and staff] for over a year and have consistently found them to be proactive, helpful, and well-informed regarding our mutual clients.’’ The registered manager explained how they shared information and progress reports with the different professionals involved in people’s care to make sure they received holistic and joined up support.

There were systems to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse. The provider had policies and procedures for safeguarding adults and to support speaking up. The staff had training in these and opportunities to discuss how to recognise and report abuse during team and individual meetings with their managers. The staff were able to explain about the procedures and told us they felt confident speaking up. People using the service explained they felt safe with 1 person commenting, “There’s never any abuse; they treat us well.” The provider had worked with the local safeguarding authority and others to investigate and respond to allegations of abuse and to protect people from further harm.

The provider had requested legal authorisations where restrictions amounted to a deprivation of liberty for people who did not have the capacity to consent to these. Decisions around these were made in people’s best interests and for their safety.

Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing had been assessed and planned for. The provider had developed comprehensive risk assessments which linked to people’s care plans. These included strategies to help reduce risks. The assessments and management plans had been developed in consultation with people and there was an emphasis on people taking responsibility for their actions and helping to reduce risks. People confirmed this, telling us they were supported to understand about their own needs and look at ways to live safely.

Risk assessments and care plans were regularly reviewed and had been updated to reflect changes in people’s needs. Staff explained they had training and support to help them de-escalate and manage situations where people became distressed or acted in a way that made others feel unsafe. A staff member explained, “We always do risk assessments, and I understand the triggers that might cause residents to feel upset, I try to avoid these but if it does happen, I try to calm people down with kindness and understanding.’’ The registered manager told us that they had recently provided enhanced mental health and non-physical approach to management of aggression training for staff. They explained this had helped equip staff for managing risks. They also commented, “We run small workshops with staff to discuss situations and raise their awareness about what they should do in different scenarios.’’

Some of the systems to ensure safety in the event of a fire needed to be reviewed and updated. For example, a recent fire drill evacuation and an accidental activation of the fire alarm had identified people did not always follow safe evacuation procedures. Some aspects of fire safety arrangements had not been reviewed to reflect the changing needs of people who lived at the service. We discussed these with the registered manager so they could review and update procedures to maintain good safety. The registered manager agreed to take appropriate action.

The building and equipment were well maintained. The staff carried out regular tests of equipment and audits to ensure the environment remained safe. A member of staff explained any faults or repairs were reported to the management team and addressed in a timely manner. People told us they liked the environment and had the facilities they needed.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. People told us their needs were met, and staff were available when they needed them. A person commented, “There’s enough staff, I don’t mind if they or male or female.” People also told us they liked the staff and trusted them.

The provider scheduled staff support to meet people’s individual needs; they deployed more staff to cover times when people needed extra support or wanted to take part in activities outside the home. There were times when staff worked at the service on their own. All the staff told us they felt safe and there were systems to help ensure they received support if needed. There were lone working procedures and members of the management team were always available on-call.

There were appropriate systems to recruit staff including checks on their suitability. The staff undertook inductions and took part in a range of training which helped to equip them for their roles and responsibilities. The management team assessed their skills, knowledge and competencies.

There were systems to help prevent and control infection. Staff told us they had completed training to understand about good infection prevention and control. Staff and people using the service were responsible for cleaning the service and maintaining good standards of hygiene. There were regular audits to check cleanliness, and food safety. Cleaning products and personal protective equipment (PPE) were available. People using the service explained they were happy with the condition of their home and cleanliness. They explained they did not mind undertaking cleaning tasks and understood this was part of their responsibilities for communal living.

There were safe systems for managing medicines. People were supported to manage their own medicines if they wanted and were able. This had been assessed, and people had signed agreements with staff to show they understood the importance of managing this safely. For other people, medicines were stored securely and administered by staff, who had been trained to understand about medicines management. There were clear and accurate records about medicines storage, administration and disposal. Staff and people using the service were given information about the medicines people were taking, any risks related to these and why they were needed. People told us medicines were given on time, and they were able to request pain relief or other PRN (as required) medicines when needed. There were protocols to describe when these should be given. Records showed these were followed. People were supported to have regular medicines reviews to make sure these remained suitable. A member of staff told us, “I completed a 3-day course about medicines and then was assessed. I regularly discuss medicines in supervision with my manager and they have observed me 2 or 3 times to make sure I am handling medicines safely.”