Alexander 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

There was a culture of speaking up where staff actively raised concerns and were supported, without fear of detriment. There was a clear whistleblowing policy in place to support this. There were regular opportunities for people, and people that matter to them, to raise issues, concerns and complaints. A system was in place to record complaints. Complaints were acknowledged and responded to in an appropriate time frame and other professionals informed and involved where appropriate. The service was open, honest, and transparent with people when things went wrong. The management team recognised their responsibilities under the duty of candour requirements and followed the service’ policies. There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements in place at all levels (locally, regionally and nationally) and staff understood their role and responsibilities. Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Audits were completed on a regular basis as part of monitoring the service provided. This enabled any trends to be spotted to ensure the service was meeting the requirements and needs of people being supported. Where actions were needed, these had been followed up. For example, care plans and risk assessments updated and involvement of relevant health and social care professionals. The service had notified CQC in full about any significant events at the service. We use this information to monitor the service and ensure they respond appropriately to keep people safe. Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them, encouraged team working and an open person-centred culture. The provider implemented relevant quality frameworks, recognised standards, and best practice to improve equity in experience and outcomes for people living at Alexander House and tackle known inequalities.

This service scored 21 (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 Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

A system was in place to record complaints. Complaints were acknowledged and responded to in an appropriate time frame and other professionals informed and involved where appropriate. The service was open, honest, and transparent with people when things went wrong. The management team recognised their responsibilities under the duty of candour requirements and followed the service’ policies.

There was a culture of speaking up where staff actively raised concerns and were supported, without fear of detriment. There was a clear whistleblowing policy in place to support this. There were regular opportunities for people, and people that matter to them, to raise issues, concerns and complaints. This was through discussions with them by staff on a regular basis and people having access to complaint forms. The complaints procedure set out the process which would be followed by the provider and included contact details of the provider and the Care Quality Commission. This ensured people were given enough information if they felt they needed to raise a concern or complaint.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements in place at all levels (locally, regionally and nationally) and staff understood their role and responsibilities. Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Audits were completed on a regular basis as part of monitoring the service provided. These checks reviewed people’s care plans and risk assessments, medicines, incidents, accidents and health and safety. This enabled any trends to be spotted to ensure the service was meeting the requirements and needs of people being supported. Where actions were needed, these had been followed up. For example, care plans and risk assessments updated and involvement of relevant health and social care professionals. The service had notified CQC in full about any significant events at the service. We use this information to monitor the service and ensure they respond appropriately to keep people safe. The provider implemented relevant quality frameworks, recognised standards, and best practice to improve equity in experience and outcomes for people living at Alexander House and tackle known inequalities.

Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them, encouraged team working and an open person-centred culture. Staff confirmed they were kept up to date with things affecting the overall service via team meetings, memos, and conversations on an on-going basis.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.