Albany House - Stratford-upon-Avon

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The registered manager told us, “I want people to have good and great days, but to acknowledge they will have days which are not so good. I want them to feel this is home, and for some of them, to feel safe for the first time.” People were positive about living at the home and the care they received. One person told us because of this, “I feel it's my home.” Relatives highlighted how well staff worked together to create a homely environment. They told us staff interacted positively with people and often shared meals alongside them. Relatives also said staff took time to understand what was important to their family members and used this information to work with people to plan their days.

Staff understood the provider’s values and how they were expected to support people. Staff described a consistent approach from senior staff, so their work focused on people’s individual needs, promoting independence, supporting people to balance their risks whilst respecting their rights to make their own choices. Staff recognised that, for some people, small steps towards greater independence represented significant achievements.

Staff told us there was a positive culture of working together with people, colleagues, and health and social care professionals. There were meetings, systems and processes in place which supported effective listening and teamwork. One staff member explained this encouraged staff to make suggestions for improving the care, and told us senior staff agreed to try out new approaches when caring for people. Senior staff reviewed how these suggestions worked, so they could take learning, where this benefited people.

Senior staff made sure staff were aware of the provider’s equality policies through training. Senior staff gave examples showing they understood the experiences and support needs of people from marginalised groups. They used this knowledge to help ensure people had fair opportunities and were supported to live the lives they chose.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the skills and knowledge of leaders at the home. People told us they saw the registered manager and senior staff regularly and were comfortable approaching them. During the inspection, we saw warm and positive interactions between people, the registered manager and senior staff. Relatives described leaders as caring and interested in their family member’s wellbeing and told us communication was effective.

Staff said the registered manager and senior staff were approachable and provided helpful advice and guidance when needed. Staff also told us leaders knew people well. We saw this was the case, with the registered manager and senior staff regularly checking on people's wellbeing and engaging with them.

The registered manager understood the links between people’s physical environment and their well-being and had successfully obtained grants to improve the home. Some of these had already been used to improve people’s bathrooms, and further work was planned to enhance the décor at the home. The registered manager also understood the additional barriers some people had experienced in their lives. They gave examples of working with partner agencies to help people overcome these challenges and achieve their goals.

The registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and submitted notifications to CQC and other relevant agencies when required. During the inspection, we identified the provider's previous rating was not displayed on the provider's website. The registered manager took immediate action with the provider to address this.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff told us they felt confident raising concerns and had no hesitation about speaking to leaders if needed. Although staff had not needed to whistleblow, they understood how to report concerns within the organisation and knew how to escalate concerns to external agencies if necessary.

Staff said senior staff and managers were approachable and that they would feel comfortable raising concerns as they arose. Regular 1-to-1 meetings provided additional opportunities for staff to discuss any issues. Systems were in place to support staff to speak up about any poor practice or concerns.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

People were cared for by a diverse staff team. Staff told us the leadership at the home recognised their individual needs and protected characteristics, and supported and respected them. Staff told us they were treated fairly and had no concerns about how they or their colleagues were supported at work. Staff gave us examples showing how the whole team and provider had worked together to support staff with protected characteristics, so they could manage their own health needs, knowing people continued to receive the care they wanted.

Staff also described being supported to work flexibly when needed to help maintain a positive work-life balance. They told us leaders understood and valued their individual circumstances. Staff said opportunities for training, development and career progression were considered fairly and were accessible to all staff.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

There had been improvements in the governance at the home, with further checks introduced and embedded. Checks were now consistently completed and any actions required followed up. There had also been a reduction in the number of medicines recording errors and further checks had improved care recording. The majority of risks were now identified and addressed.

There had been changes to the registration of the home since our last inspection, with the service no longer providing nursing care. This had resulted in changes to support arrangements, including at night. People had not raised any concerns about access to care during night shifts, and records showed people’s needs were promptly attended to during both day and night shifts.

The registered manager had also developed systems which enable them to have an overview of how governance was working at Albany House. These had been shared more widely across the provider’s other local services.

The registered manager told us they undertook unannounced spot checks on the quality and safety of care. These had not always been recorded. We discussed this with the registered manager who advised they would record all such visits in the future to provide a clear audit trail.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

People were treated as full partners in their care and involved in decisions about their support and were encouraged to share their views about the home. Although formal house meetings were not held, people told us they felt comfortable speaking with staff and sharing suggestions through day-to-day conversations and care reviews.

Relatives said staff listened to them and welcomed their views. One relative told us, “I definitely feel listened to, and staff call me if there is anything wrong. They want my suggestions.”

The service worked in partnership with relatives, employers, and health and social care professionals to support positive outcomes for people. Professionals spoke positively about joint working arrangements, and a local employer told us, “My interaction with Albany staff has been superb. Their team have always been informative, detailed in the right areas and professional.”

The registered manager developed partnerships with local voluntary organisations, statutory services and employers, and hosted volunteer placements. These partnerships benefited both people using the service and the wider community by creating opportunities for participation and skill development.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

There were systems in place to monitor quality of the service and inform learning and improvements. These included analysing surveys completed by people about the quality of the care. This approach ensured senior staff had full oversight of the service and identified any areas for improvement.

Health and social care professionals told us staff sought and took learning from advice they provided. This helped to ensure people received good care.

The management team were open and transparent and engaged positively during the inspection. They welcomed feedback and were committed to continuously learn and improve care.