• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: St Albans House

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

12 The Grove, Deal, Kent, CT14 9TL (01304) 374243

Provided and run by:
Deal Old Peoples Housing Society Limited

All Inspections

20 April 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out on the 20 April 2017 and was unannounced.

St Albans House provides accommodation for up to 19 older people who need support with their personal care. The service is converted house. Accommodation is arranged over three floors. A stair lift and a passenger lift are available to assist people to access the upper floors. The service has 19 single rooms including two with en-suite facilities. There were 14 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

The registered provider, Deal Old People’s Housing Society Limited is a registered charity and a committee oversees the running of the service. A registered manager was working at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us that they felt safe living at St Alban’s. However, detailed information was not available for staff to refer to about how to manage risks to people. This did not impact on people as staff knew how to keep people as safe as possible. Accidents and incidents had been recorded, these had not been analysed to identify any patterns or trends to prevent them happening again.

People received their medicines when they needed them, but medicines were not always recorded and managed safely.

There was not always sufficient staff on duty to provide care and support to people when they needed it. Care plans did not contain detailed information about people’s choices and preferences. Staff knew people well and supported them in a person centred way.

The provider had a recruitment process in place to make sure that staff employed were of good character. This process had not been followed consistently and shortfalls were identified at the inspection. Staff had completed training to be able to provide safe and effective care, however, this training needed to be updated.

Staff received one to one supervision and yearly appraisals to identify their development and training needs. Staff told us that they did not always feel supported or listened to by the registered manager, and some of their concerns had not been addressed. The culture within the service was not open, inclusive and empowering. The registered manager and the staff were not working together as a team. Staff felt that the service had lost its vision about the care provided.

Checks on the environment and appliances such as the lift and boiler had been completed to keep people safe. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Surveys had been sent to relatives, staff and other stakeholders such as district nurses but not to people. Audits had been completed but not identified the shortfalls found within the service.

The registered manager had not formally assessed people’s capacity to make specific decisions. When speaking with people they had capacity and staff supported them to make decisions. People can only be deprived of their liberty so that they can receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under MCA. The application procedure for this in care homes and hospitals are called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were not restricted and there were no authorisations in place.

People’s health was monitored and staff worked with health and social care professionals to make sure people’s health care needs were met. People were offered a balanced diet and were offered food they liked. People had the opportunity to join in activities; people told us that staff supported them to continue their hobbies and interests.

Staff were kind and caring to people and treated them with dignity and respect. Relatives and friends were encouraged to visit people. Staff knew visitors and people well; there was a warm and friendly relationship. Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident to raise any concerns they had with the registered manager.

There were procedures in place to record and investigate complaints, there had been no complaints recorded. The provider had submitted notifications to the Care Quality Commission in a timely manner and in line with guidelines.

We found three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and made recommendations. You can see what actions we have asked the provider to take at the end of this report.

16 and 17 September 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out on 16 and 17 September 2015 and was unannounced.  

St Albans House provides accommodation for up to 19 older people who need support with their personal care. The service is a converted domestic property. Accommodation is arranged over three floors. A stair lift and a passenger lift are available to assist people to get to the upper floors. The service has 19 single bedrooms, including 2 with en-suite facilities. One bedroom is currently being used as a meeting/training room and a place for people to meet with visitors in private. There were 16 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

The registered provider, Deal Old People’s Housing Society Limited is a registered charity and a committee oversees the running of the service. A registered manager was not working at the service, a new manager had started work at the service on 4 September 2015 and intended to apply for registration. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the care and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The manager provided strong leadership to the staff and had oversight of all areas of the service. Staff were motivated and felt supported by the manager. The staff team had a clear vision of the aims of the service. Staff told us the manager was approachable and they were confident to raise any concerns they had with them. Plans were in place to continually improve the service.

There were enough staff, who knew people well, to meet peoples’ needs at all times. The needs of people had been considered when deciding how many staff were required on each shift. Staff had the time and skills to provide the care and support people needed. Staff were clear about their roles.

Staff recruitment systems were in place and information about staff had been obtained to make sure staff did not pose a risk to people. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) criminal records checks had been completed.  The DBS helps employers make safer recruitment decisions and helps prevent unsuitable people from working with people who use care and support services.

Staff were supported to provide good quality care and support. The manager had a plan in place to keep staff skills up to date. Most staff held recognised qualifications in care. Staff met regularly with the manager to discuss their role and practice and any concerns they had.

Staff knew the possible signs of abuse and were confident to raise concerns they had with the manager or the local authority safeguarding team. Plans were in place and staff knew how to keep people safe in an emergency.

People’s needs had been assessed to identify the care they required. Care and support was planned with people and reviewed to keep people safe and support them to be as independent as possible. Detailed guidance had not been provided to staff about how to provide all areas of the care and support people needed, however people received consistent care as staff knew them well. We have made a recommendation about care plan records.

People got the medicines they needed to keep them safe and well. Action was taken to identify changes in people’s health, including regular health checks. People were supported by staff to receive the care they needed to keep them as safe and well as possible.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Arrangements were in place to check if people were at risk of being deprived of their liberty.  Systems were in operation to obtain consent from people and to make decisions in people’s best interests were in place. People had capacity and were supported to make decisions and choices.

People were supported to participate in hobbies and activities they enjoyed. Plans were being made to increase the variety of activities offered to people at their request. Possible risks to people had been identified and were managed to keep people as safe as possible.

People were involved in choosing their own food and drinks and were supported to have a balanced diet. A variety of equipment was provided to support people to remain independent when eating and drinking. Choices were offered to people in ways they understood. Staff listened to what people told them and responded appropriately. People were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity was maintained.  

People were confident to raise concerns and complaints about the service. These were investigated and people had received a satisfactory response.

The manager and committee members completed regular checks of the quality of the service provided. When shortfalls were found action was taken quickly to address these and prevent them from occurring again. People, their relatives, staff and visiting professionals were asked about their experiences of the care. These were used to improve and develop the service.

The environment was safe, clean and homely. Maintenance and refurbishment plans were in place. Appropriate equipment was provided to support people to remain independent and keep them safe. Safety checks were completed regularly.

Accurate records were kept about the care and support people received and about the day to day running of the service and provided staff with the information they needed to provide safe and consistent care and support to people.

We last inspected St Albans House in July 2013. At that time we found that the registered provider and manager were complying with the regulations.

11 July 2013

During a routine inspection

There were 17 people using the service at the time of our inspection. We met and spoke with many of them. Everyone we spoke to said they were happy living there. One person told us, 'this place is very good. The staff are very good, they do anything for you'.

The deputy manager described the service as, 'Everything is about the people who live here'. We found that this ethos ran through the service.

People were able to make choices about their services and were encouraged to remain independent. One person told us, 'I get up and I go to bed when I want to. I ring the bell and staff come and help me'.

Most staff had worked at the service for many years and knew people well. The manager had completed appropriate checks on new staff to ensure people were safe. People said, "It's very nice living here. They look after us very well."

People said they felt safe and well looked after. They looked comfortable and at ease with each other and staff. We saw people chatting to each other in a relaxed way.

People were involved in planning of their care and were supported to make plans for the future. People were kept informed about their care and treatment.

People received their medicines in a safe way. Medicines were available when people needed them. We also found that the service had a safe process for disposing of unwanted medicines. People were able to take homely remedies, such as a pain killer for a head ache when they needed to.

30 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People who use the service told us what it was like to live at this service and described how they were treated by staff and their involvement in making choices about their care.

People said that they were happy with the care and support they received and that their needs were being met in all areas. They said that the staff treated them with respect, listened to them and supported them to raise any concerns they had about their care. People told us that the service responded to their health needs quickly and that the manager talked to them regularly about their plan of care and any changes that may be needed.

Many comments received were complimentary of the service. One lady said 'It's lovely here' another said 'We go out for day trips in the minibus. I love it here'. Other people were complimentary of the food and had no concerns re the quality of care. Another said 'this is one of the better homes in Deal. I am very happy here'.

25 September 2011

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were happy with the care and support they were receiving and that their needs were being met in all areas. They said that the staff treated them with respect, listened to them and supported them to raise any concerns they had about their care. People told us that the service responded to their health needs quickly and that the manager talked to them regularly about their plan of care and any changes that may be needed.