You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The inspection took place on 10 November 2016. The inspection was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.

We last visited the service on 8 April 2016 to carry out a focused inspection where we looked at the questions, “Is the service safe” and “Is the service well-led.” We found that the provider was meeting all the regulations we inspected against.

Albury House is a care home and provides residential care for up to 12 people. It is located near the centre of Berwick upon Tweed and provides accommodation on two floors. There were 11 people living at the home at the time of the inspection.

The provider is a husband and wife partnership, Mr and Mrs Burn. Mrs Burn was also the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was supported by the assistant manager.

People told us that they felt safe at the service. There had been no safeguarding concerns. Medicines were managed safely.

Checks were carried out to ensure that applicants were suitable to work with vulnerable people. This included obtaining written references and a Disclosure and Barring Service check [DBS]. We saw that staff carried out their duties in a calm unhurried manner.

The premises were clean. Checks and tests had been carried out to ensure that the premises and equipment were safe.

Staff told us, and records confirmed that training was available. There was an appraisal and supervision system in place. This meant there was a system in place to ensure that staff were supported and competent to carry out their job role.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People’s nutritional needs were met and they had access to a range of healthcare services.

We observed very kind and thoughtful interactions between staff and people. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and could explain these to us. A computerised care management system was in place to plan, assess and review people’s care.

An activities programme was in place to help meet people's social needs. The provider had their own transport to enable people to access the local community.

There was a complaints procedure in place. No complaints had been received in the last 12 months. None of the people or relatives with whom we spoke raised any complaints about the service.

Audits and checks were carried out to monitor all aspects of the service. There was a refurbishment programme in place and continual improvements to the environment were being made. Staff told us that they enjoyed working at the home and said they felt valued by the provider.

The registration requirements of the service were met. The provider had notified us appropriately of any changes and events at the service in line with legal requirements.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The service was safe.

There were safeguarding procedures in place.

Medicines were managed safely.

The premises were clean. Checks and tests had been carried out to ensure that the premises were safe.

Recruitment checks were carried out to ensure that staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The service was effective.

Staff told us, and records confirmed that training was available. There was an appraisal and supervision system in place.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 in their work.

People's nutritional needs were met and they were supported to access healthcare services.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The service was caring.

People and relatives told us that staff were caring. We saw positive interactions between people and staff.

Staff were motivated and committed and spoke with pride about the importance of ensuring people’s needs were held in the forefront of everything they did.

People and relatives told us and our own observations confirmed that staff promoted people's privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The service was responsive.

Care plans were in place which detailed the individual care and support to be provided for people.

An activities programme was in place to help meet people's social needs.

There was a complaints procedure in place.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 December 2016

The service was well led.

Audits and checks were carried out to monitor all the service.

Records relating to people, staff and the management of the service were stored safely and completed accurately.

Staff told us that morale was good and they enjoyed working at the service.