Albany House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 management and staff team made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People were supported in line with their care plans and personal preferences. Care plans were developed with input from people using the service and, where appropriate, their relatives, advocates and health and social care professionals. Staff told us they could access and update care records, and that important changes were recorded and shared through handovers. This supported staff to provide care that reflected people’s current needs.

The management and staff teams understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff received guidance and training to support people safely, recognise changes in their needs and know when to seek advice from external healthcare professionals. The service had established positive working relationships with the local GP practice and pharmacy, which supported joined up and consistent care.

A visiting social care professional told us communication with the staff team was very good and that staff kept them updated about changes in people’s care and support needs. Staff had taken on additional tasks, including supporting people to order their medicines, which helped promote effective partnership working and continuity of care.

The management team supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Signage around the home was clear and supported people and visitors to find their way around the home.

Families told us communication with the staff team, including the registered manager, was good and they were always kept informed about their relative’s needs and support.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were supported to share feedback, raise concerns or make complaints about their care and support. A family member told us, “[Relative} has been here quite a while now and we have no concerns but if we did, I feel certain I or [relative] could raise them, and they would be listened to.”

The provider had a process in place to manage formal complaints. Team meetings were used to discuss concerns raised and we saw documented examples of lessons learned and how these had been actioned.

Feedback from health and social care professionals was positive about the quality of the service. Staff told us the registered manager listened to them and said they felt confident to raise any concerns.

The staff team made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff understood how important it was for people to access the health and social care support they needed. Care was well planned and documented. Records showed people were supported to access services when required. This included diabetes or mental health support or attending the dentist. Positive working relationships with local health and social care professionals helped promote timely and coordinated care.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff used information about people’s needs and preferences to provide personalised care. Care plans showed the whole staff team considered people’s protected characteristics and made reasonable adjustments to support fair and equal experiences.

Staff had completed training relevant to people’s assessed needs. The management team had systems in place to make sure staff understood people’s needs and preferences and could support them safely and consistently.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Records showed people were supported to discuss their preferences and wishes for the future. These plans were reviewed as part of care plan reviews. This helped make sure they stayed up to date. Plans were in place for people going through important life changes. This included people thinking about moving to more independent living. Relevant health and social care professionals were involved when needed. The management team had ensured appropriate staff training was available in relation to end of life care.