Archived: Aldington House

Aldington House is located in Blackheath, South East London. It is a residential care home which accommodates up to 31 older people. At the time of our inspection 23 people were using the service.

There had been no registered manger in post since July 2015. A permanent manager was recruited into post in September 2015 but left their post in January 2016. At the time of the inspection, an interim manager was responsible for managing the service whilst the provider recruited a permanent manager into post. 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.

People using the service said they felt safe and were happy living at the home. The provider had safeguarding adults and whistleblowing policies in place and staff understood how to safeguard the people in their care from abuse. Staff knew of the whistleblowing procedure and told us they would use it if required; however, they were confident that the management team would take action if any concerns were raised. The provider had appropriate recruitment and selection processes in place before new staff started work with the service. There were appropriate numbers of staff on each shift to ensure people’s needs were met. Risk to people had been assessed and where risks were identified, appropriate action plans were in place to prevent or minimise the risk. People's medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed by healthcare professionals. There were arrangements in place for foreseeable emergencies and a refurbishment project was on-going to improve the quality of the environment for people.

Support was in place for staff in the form of induction, training and supervision to ensure they had appropriate skills and knowledge to perform the role which they had been employed to undertake. Both staff and the management team demonstrated a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink for their wellbeing. Where required, people had access to a range of healthcare professionals.

People’s privacy and dignity were maintained and their independence promoted. People were supported to keep relationships with their family and friends. Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs with regards to their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and gender and supported people appropriately to meet their identified needs and wishes. People were provided appropriate information and were involved in their care planning and delivery.

Each person using the service had a care plan in place with appropriate guidance for staff on how to support them. People’s care plans were reviewed monthly or as required to ensure their changing needs were identified and met. There was a range of appropriate activities available for people to enjoy. People knew how to make a complaint if they were not happy about the quality of care delivery. At the time of our inspection, people and their relatives told us they did not have anything to complain about.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service including surveys, residents and staff meetings. All staff we spoke with were happy working at the home and health and social care providers were complimentary about the care delivery.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe and secure in the home. Staff we spoke with understood the procedures they needed to follow to ensure that people were safe. They were able to describe the different ways that people might experience abuse and the appropriate steps to take if they were concerned that abuse had taken place.

Procedures for dealing with emergencies were in place and staff were able to describe these to us.

The home manager sets the staff rotas. They told us that they took people's care needs into account when making decisions about the numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required to ensure that people's needs were met.

Is the service effective?

Everyone using the service had an individual care plan which set out their care needs. People told us they had been involved in the assessment of their health and care needs and had contributed to developing their care plan. Assessments included medication needs, mobility and religious and cultural needs. People told us that staff supported them to complete daily tasks such as washing and mobilising in the home using mobility equipment such as a standing hoist, wheelchair or a walking frame.

People had access to a range of health care professionals some of which visited the home. People told us that staff escorted them to healthcare appointments where required.

This showed that people's individual care needs and wishes were known and planned for to ensure their needs were met.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. When we asked people how they felt living in the home, their comments included 'I feel like a king', 'staff are lovely', 'I like it here', 'if I have to be in a care home, I couldn't ask for more.' All the relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support their family members received at the home.

Staff were aware of people's preferences, interests and diverse needs. Our observations of the care provided, discussions with people and records we looked at showed that individual care and support wishes were taken into account and respected.

Is the service responsive?

People told us, that they were able to participate in a range of activities both in the home and in the local community. The activities provided included those people could enjoy as a group and others that met their individual interests. One person told us that 'I am not a social animal therefore I prefer to do activities on my own rather than in a group'. We saw that the individual was supported to participate in their preferred activities alone whilst a group session was taking place.

People told us they were involved in reviewing their plans of care when their needs changed. A relative told us that after their family member's last fall, the provider had been looking at ways they could mitigate the risk of falls and had involved them in the decision making process.

People we spoke with knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. Most people said they had nothing to complain about. However some people told us that complaints they had made in the past were taken seriously and addressed to their satisfaction.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to ensure people received their care in a joined up way.

The home had quality assurance systems in place and records we looked at showed that any shortfalls identified were addressed promptly and management plans were put in place to prevent any future occurrences.

Staff we spoke with told us that they felt supported in their role and that they had no concerns. A new member of staff told us that they were well supported by all staff including their line manager to ensure they perform their role to the expected standard.

We found that people’s care needs were met and staff understood each person and the support they required. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drinks. We found that staff were aware of their responsibility to prevent and report any form of abuse. Support was in place to ensure that staff received adequate supervision and training. The provider had a system in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.