You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 21 June 2019

About the service: Aldbourne Nursing Home is a care home that is registered to provide personal and nursing care to up to 40 people. At the time of the inspection, 31 people were living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were happy with the care they received and complimentary about the staff. People could follow their own routines and take assessed risks. People’s privacy and dignity was promoted although not all had been asked about the gender of staff supporting them. People enjoyed the meals, which were based on preferences and fresh produce. People received regular support from a range of health and social care professionals to remain healthy. People were encouraged to give their views about the service and could join in with a range of social activities. There were strong links with the local community and the home was very much considered part of the village.

Trained staff administered people’s medicines and their competency was assessed. However, information about “as required” medicines was limited in detail. This did not ensure the medicines were administered as prescribed and to maximum effect. Records did not show people’s topical creams had been appropriately applied.

Whilst staff asked people’s consent before interventions, records did not show the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had been followed. Information was limited in detail and did not show the least restrictive options had been considered.

Risks to people’s safety had been identified yet records did not always show action had been taken to minimise these. For example, food and fluid monitoring charts were not consistently completed or analysed. Information did not always show people had been repositioned, as per their care plan, to minimise risks of pressure ulceration.

Focus was being given to the building and extensive building work was being completed. This was to enhance people’s communal space and included a new dining room, hairdressing room and activities room. Whilst all areas were light and airy, the corridors lacked colour and signage to help people find their way around more easily. The home was clean and there were no odours.

There were enough staff to support people. Staff had received training in areas such as safeguarding and fire safety, as well as topics associated with health conditions and older age. Work had been completed regarding staff’s strengths and learning styles to ensure a good skill mix within the team. Staff felt well supported and received one to one meetings with their supervisor to discuss their role. Safe practices were followed when recruiting new staff.

There was a strong management presence and a clear desire to ensure people received a good standard of care. Daily ‘walk arounds’ and regular audits took place but shortfalls with people’s documentation had not been identified. There was a strong caring ethos, which was adopted throughout the staff team.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection on 5 and 6 July 2016, the service was rated as Outstanding. The report of this inspection was published on 10 August 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a planned, comprehensive inspection, based on the rating at the last inspection.

Action we told provider to take: We made two recommendations as part of this inspection. This was to improve the content of Mental Capacity Assessments and the information regarding “as required” medicines and the application of topical creams.

Follow up: We will monitor all intelligence about the service and complete another inspection in line with this and our frequency of inspection guidance.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Inspection areas



Updated 21 June 2019

The service was safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.



Updated 21 June 2019

The service was effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 21 June 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.



Updated 21 June 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.



Updated 21 June 2019

The service was well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.