• Care Home
  • Care home

Alma Lodge Care Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Staveley Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex, BN20 7LH (01323) 734208

Provided and run by:
Alma Lodge Care Home

Important:

We served three warning notices on Alma Lodge Care Home on 9 February 2026 for failing to meet the regulations related to staffing , safe care and treatment and governance at Alma Lodge Care Home.
 

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Requires improvement

Updated 7 January 2026

Date of assessment, 12 January to 23 January 2026.
Alma Lodge Care Home is a residential care home providing personal care up to a maximum of 14 people. The service provides support to older people with physical health needs. Some people were living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 10 people living at the home, one of whom was admitted to hospital during the inspection.

The service was last inspected in May 2022 and rated Requires Improvement with breaches of regulation in safe care and treatment and good governance. This inspection was planned to follow up on concerns received, regarding peoples’ safety and well-being, and we took this opportunity to look at the previous breaches of regulation.

At this inspection, we identified areas that still needed to improve, and the rating has remained Requires Improvement. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations of safe care and treatment, and good governance. Not enough improvements were found at this inspection and the provider remained in breach of these regulations. We also found a breach of the regulation about safe and effective staffing.

People’s safety was not consistently considered, and risk was not managed pro-actively. There were no records of lessons learned following incidents. Care plans and risk assessments were not up to date or consistent with each other. There were care plans missing for some people. Whilst staff and people said they could speak up; they also said action had not always been taken. The governance and overview of processes had not ensured safe and consistent care. The in-house audits were not consistently robust and had not identified the shortfalls found and discussed during the inspection process. The provider took immediate action to make improvements where issues had the potential to impact on safe outcomes for people. For example, specific care documentation and risk assessments.

There were insufficient numbers of staff deployed, and care staff were also doing the cooking, cleaning and doing the laundry. This meant at times staff struggled to provide the support and care necessary for people. There was only one care staff member on duty between the hours of 6pm and 8pm which meant there was insufficient cover in the case of an emergency. The staff rota did not identify the staff on duty at night, and the management teams working hours were not reflected on the rota.

The home was not adequately clean and there were some environmental risks identified such as unsafe flooring which could be a trip hazard.

New staff received an induction and training which enabled them to manage people’s health and social care effectively. People’s privacy was respected and their independence encouraged within the limits of personal safety. Feedback relating to communication and response to concerns was mixed with some people reporting positive and timely responses from the service when issues were raised, and others telling us there was often a delay in getting answers when they raised queries. People told us that staff were kind and caring. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and there was a friendly culture in the service.


 

People's experience of the service

Updated 7 January 2026

While people expressed general satisfaction with their care, our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards. People and their relatives gave mixed feedback about living in the service. People told us they were cared for by kind, and respectful staff, who knew them well. We heard that people were encouraged to be as independent as possible and were supported to keep in touch with family and friends. Relatives felt well informed and able to raise any issues.

People told us, “I have settled in well, look after me and my family can visit,” “Staff are very kind and helpful,” “Not enough staff, I have had to wait in the morning for over half an hour,” and "It okay here." Relatives told us, “There have been problems but nothing bad,” and “I really can’t thank them enough for what they do for my relative.”