Alexander Residential Home

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. For example, one person had become aggressive towards a staff member, and this was closely monitored following the incident with a behaviour chart to identify any trends that could mitigate such risks. One relative said, “I feel safe when I go home knowing that [Name] is ok.” Staff told us they were aware of the process for reporting concerns, felt confident to do so and had received safeguarding training.

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. We observed safe moving and handling when people were supported to use a wheelchair or a hoist. Staff said they were regularly updated about people’s needs and had access to care plans and risk assessments. Staff said they had time to read people’s care plans and were able to explain and give examples of how to mitigate risk and what to do if a person was at risk.

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 and development. The registered managers told us they were planning for the future by training staff to become managers and had a two-year pathway to achieve this. This allowed staff time to develop their role, under the responsibilities of a manager and to ensure consistency for the residents who already knew these staff members. There was a supervision and appraisal policy in place which had been recently reviewed. We found supervision and appraisals had not been carried out on a regular basis in the past however, the manager had set up a matrix in 2025 to ensure all staff received these on a regular basis in line with their policy. We saw evidence of supervisions being held in January and February 2025. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. One staff member said, “There is always enough staff, same on a weekend as through the week.” One person told us, “The staff are lovely, I have no doubt about that. They listen to you when you ask for something.”

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.