Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at Alpine Lodge

Goodpublished 9 December 2024, 21 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, August 2023

Rated Requires Improvement; improvements were made and special measures have ended, but records, medicines checks and oversight still need work.

This was an unannounced focused inspection on 15 June 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals. They observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.

The overall rating remains Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also rated Requires Improvement. Responsive improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Caring was not assessed in this focused inspection.

Inspectors found improvements since the previous inspection in December 2022. Staffing levels were sufficient, safeguarding systems were in place, incidents were reviewed and people were generally treated kindly. However, some care records were unclear or incomplete, checks on self-administered medicines needed to be stronger, and management systems needed to show that improvements would last.

The home had previously been in Special Measures and had breaches of regulations. It was no longer rated Inadequate, was no longer in Special Measures and was no longer in breach of those regulations at this inspection.

What inspectors praised
  • Staffing and recruitment

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Recruitment checks were also completed.

    “At this inspection we found staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
  • Safeguarding

    People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood how to report concerns and safeguarding policies were available.

    “Staff received safeguarding training and knew the procedures to follow if they had concerns about people's safety.” from the report
  • Personalised care

    People were involved in decisions about their care, and plans included how they preferred to be supported.

    “People were involved in planning their care and how they wished for it to be provided.” from the report
  • Activities and family contact

    The range and frequency of activities had increased. People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends.

    “Since the last inspection the range and frequency of activities offered had increased.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Care records

    needs fixing

    Some records did not clearly or consistently show the care people needed, including monitoring of fluids, nutrition and repositioning.

    “However, records used to monitor risk were not always consistent or showed follow up action taken where a risk had been identified.” from the report
  • Management oversight

    needs fixing

    Governance systems had improved, but the home still needed clearer evidence that they were effective and that improvements would be sustained.

    “However, some improvements were still required to evidence their effectiveness as well as to demonstrate clear oversight and scrutiny of the service to support continuous improvement.” from the report
  • Dementia-friendly information

    minor

    Some dementia-friendly signs and accessible information were missing. Temporary signs were put in place after the inspection.

    “However, there continued to be a lack of dementia friendly signage around the service to assist people with orientation around the building and accessible information in different formats.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What checks are now in place to make sure care records are complete and reflect each person's current needs?
  2. 02How do you check medicines that people administer themselves are taken as prescribed?
  3. 03What evidence can you show that recent governance and quality improvements are being sustained?
  4. 04When will the remaining dementia-friendly signs and accessible information be in place?
  5. 05How are staffing levels and deployment reviewed at weekends and as occupancy changes?

This was a focused inspection covering Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led; Caring was not assessed and its previous rating was not reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2022

Rated Requires Improvement and remains in special measures; care was improving but risk records and management oversight were still not reliable.

This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 27 October 2022. Three inspectors and an Expert by Experience visited the home. They spoke with three people and 12 staff, reviewed four people's care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management records, and made further checks after the visit.

Inspectors found improvements since the previous inspection. People appeared well cared for and the atmosphere was friendly. Medicines were generally handled safely, the home was clean, infection control was good, staff training was appropriate, and complaints were managed well.

There were still important problems. Risk assessments and care records were not always updated or accurate. Records about food and drink were inconsistent, some staff competency checks were incomplete, staffing levels had caused concern, and activities were limited. Management audits had not found all these problems.

The overall rating improved from Inadequate to Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective and Responsive were rated Requires Improvement, while Well-led remained Inadequate. The home remains in special measures and will be kept under review.

What inspectors praised
  • Improving culture

    Inspectors saw a friendlier, more person-centred culture and said the provider had made progress since the previous inspection.

    “There were clear signs of improvement at the service, which was reflected in feedback from people and external stakeholders.” from the report
  • Infection control

    The home was clean and inspectors were assured that infection prevention arrangements, including the use of protective equipment, were effective.

    “The premises were clean and there was good infection control practice in place.” from the report
  • Safe medicines handling

    Medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. Audits were carried out and action was taken when problems were found.

    “Medicines were received, stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
  • Training and support

    Staff received training relevant to their roles and people's needs. Staff also received formal supervision to discuss their development.

    “Staff were receiving appropriate training, which was relevant to their role and people's needs.” from the report
  • Choice and dignity

    Care had become more person-centred. People were offered choices, their rooms were personalised, and staff supported dignity and independence.

    “The model of care helped to maximise people's choice, control and independence.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Inaccurate risk and care records

    serious

    Some risk assessments and care plans were out of date, contradictory or missing information. This could lead to people receiving unsafe or unsuitable care.

    “Risk assessments had not been updated to reflect significant changes in people's care and support needs.” from the report
  • Food and drink monitoring

    serious

    Records for people at risk of losing weight were not consistently completed. Staff could not always tell whether people were eating and drinking enough.

    “These records were inconsistently kept. This meant staff could not be sure whether those people were eating and drinking enough to improve their health or remained at risk.” from the report
  • Staffing levels

    needs fixing

    People and staff reported delays and shortages, particularly at night, with reliance on agency staff who might not know people's needs. Staffing was increased during the inspection.

    “There's not always enough staff, sometimes you have to wait such a long time when you buzz” from the report
  • Weak management checks

    serious

    The home's audits did not identify all the problems found by inspectors. Management systems had been introduced but were not yet effective enough to show that improvements were sustained.

    “Audits did not identify all of the issues we found during the inspection, such as people's care records did not accurately reflect their care and support needs.” from the report
  • Limited activities

    minor

    Inspectors did not see activities during the visit. Records showed activities had taken place on only eight days in October.

    “Activity records showed there had been only 8 days of activities for people to join in October.” from the report
  • Medicine competency checks

    needs fixing

    Not all staff giving medicines had completed the competency assessment required by the provider's own policy. The manager said this would be addressed.

    “However not all staff had an assessment of their competency to administer medicines completed in line with the providers own policy.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How have you corrected the contradictory or missing information in care plans and risk assessments?
  2. 02How do you now check that food and fluid records are completed accurately for people at risk of losing weight or dehydration?
  3. 03What are the current staffing levels on each unit, including at night, and has the increase made during the inspection continued?
  4. 04How have you completed medicine competency checks for every staff member who administers medicines?
  5. 05What activities are now available, and how do you make sure people can take part regularly?

This was an unannounced follow-up inspection that reviewed the service's progress after the previous inspection and included infection prevention and control; no Caring rating was given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 December 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Alpine Lodge

8 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. August 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Alpine Lodge →

  2. December 2022Requires improvementup from Inadequate
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate

    Read what inspectors found at Alpine Lodge →

  3. March 2022Inadequatestayed Inadequate
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. December 2021Inadequatedown from Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. December 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. September 2017Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. April 2016Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. December 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. March 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. January 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. October 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  13. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield

These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.

Most charge £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
Claire A., about Carla M.
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
Alison P., about Beatrice M.
See live-in carers near SheffieldProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.