• Care Home
  • Care home

Alicia Nursing Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

105-115 and 33-35 Marsh Road, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU3 2QG (01582) 560500

Provided and run by:
Apex Care Homes Limited

Important:

We served a warning notice on Apex Care Homes limited on 21 March 2025 for failing to meet the regulations related to safeguarding, premises and equipment, safe care and treatment, and governance at Alicia Nursing Home.

Assessment report published 17 June 2025

On this page

Caring

Requires improvement

17 June 2025

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement: This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Kindness, compassion and dignity

Score: 3

The provider treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. We observed staff spoke to people kindly and respectfully and provided people with reassurance and comfort wherever needed. We observed that staff knocked on people's bedroom doors and sought permission before entering. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. One person told us, “[Staff] make me very happy here”. Another said, “It’s quite nice living here, people are kind.” A relative said, “The care is wonderful here, I have seen nothing but kindness. I am happy I see the same staff members and when there are new ones they are mentored by the experienced staff.”

Treating people as individuals

Score: 3

The provider took account of people’s abilities, and culture. Care plans contained information about people’s spiritual and cultural beliefs. Where able to obtain them, life histories had been captured to enable staff to understand people’s past. One person said, “I like it here, I have a nice room with photos of my family. I have choice when I get up and when I go to bed, I have hot tea and biscuits in the evening.” Another person said, “I like to go out, they took me to Burns night at a community centre. They are a happy lot.”

Independence, choice and control

Score: 3

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Where people were able, they were supported and encouraged to go out into and be a part of the local community, for example to the local shops. The service organised regular group activities. We observed people participating and appeared to be enjoying these during our assessment. Staff did things at people’s own pace and did not rush them. One person said, “They understand me, I get what I want, I can’t ask for much more.”

Responding to people’s immediate needs

Score: 2

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We received feedback and concerns about staff deployment in one area of the service, we were told people would sometimes need to wait for periods of time to have their needs attended to. One relative said, “The care is good here and there are usually enough staff, although when my [relative] needs to use the toilet, sometimes they have to wait. “

Despite this feedback, we found if people were experiencing pain, this was well managed, and call bells were answered promptly. A relative said, “The nurse is excellent, they know their patients and detect any slight rise in temperature. The carers know all the people well too.”

Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Score: 1

The provider did not promote the wellbeing of their staff. For example, we identified incidents where staff had been exposed to harm. These were not always captured as incidents and were not reviewed to ensure staff received support and debriefing or to identify any lessons learned. One staff member said, “A lot of staff won’t say they got hurt as they are worried they will be sent home.” However, staff also told us they felt supported by the senior leadership team and by the wider staff team. Where staff had come from abroad, the provider supported staff transition into the country with a welcome pack, this provided information such as setting up bank accounts and how to register with a local GP.