Archived: Albert Lodge

Albert Lodge is registered to offer support and accommodation for up to six people who have a past or present experience of mental ill health. On the days of our visit there were six people living at the home.

There was no registered manager in place. The manager told us they had sent an application in and were waiting for checks to be carried out. 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.

Staff supported people to maintain their safety. Assessments were undertaken to identify any risks to a person’s safety and management plans were in place to address those risks. Staff were aware of signs and symptoms that a person’s mental health may be deteriorating and how this impacted on the risks associated with the person’s behaviour.

People were supported as appropriate to maintain their physical and mental health. People had care plans outlining the goals they wished to achieve whilst at the service and what support they required from staff to achieve them. The service used a recovery model in helping people to achieve their goals.

Staff were working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 which meant that they were making sure people had support in place if they needed to be assisted with decision making.

They also worked within the principles of the Mental Health Act 1983(2007) which meant they were making sure people were safe and staff were following legal guidelines.

Staff worked in combination with the community mental health team to ensure people received adequate support. Any concerns about a person’s health were shared with the person’s external care coordinator so they could receive additional support and treatment when required.

Safe medicines management processes were in place and people received their medicines as prescribed. However, medicine patches were not disposed of safely and there was no signage to indicate use of oxygen. We have made a recommendation about this.

Staff encouraged people to undertake activities and supported them to become more independent. Staff spent time engaging people in conversations, and spoke to them politely and respectfully.

People were encouraged to express their opinions and views about the service. There were regular meetings with people and individual support was provided through a key worker system.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs, and attended regular training courses.

Staff were supported by their manager and felt able to raise any concerns they had or suggestions to improve the service.

The management team undertook checks on the quality of service delivery. A range of audits were undertaken to ensure the service was delivered in line with the provider’s policies and procedures, and that people received the support they required.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found:-

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that staff showed patience and knew the six people as individuals. One person told us, 'You can't fault the staff they are lovely'. People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs were recorded and met. Care and support was provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People told us that the manager and staff listened to them. They reported they were involved in making decisions regarding their care and the running of the home. People were offered three structured activities a day but people told us these were optional and they could join in if they wanted. The member of staff responsible for arranging activities told us there was a daily programme but these were not fixed and could be changed to meet people's needs daily.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. There were systems in place to make sure that the manager and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations.

The service was safe, clean and hygienic. People were responsible for keeping their room and the home clean with the support of the staff.

People were supported by staff who had the appropriate skills and experience to ensure people's safety and welfare. Staff had a good awareness of the needs of people who lived at the home.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) which applies to care homes. While no applications had needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them and care plans were produced from this process. People told us their needs were met and they had regular reviews to ensure they were satisfied with the care and support they were receiving. Staff received appropriate training and support to ensure they could meet and understood the needs of people.

Is the service well led?

People and staff spoken with all told us the manager was approachable and would listen to any concerns or ideas they had to improve the service. We were able to establish the home had an effective system for managing and assessing the overall quality of service provided. Staff received appropriate support through supervision sessions and were clear about their roles and responsibilities and management were supportive of their roles.

We spoke with three people living at the home. All three told us they were happy with the care and support they received and were able to make choices and decisions about their care. One person said "the staff spend a long time explaining things" and another told us they get a say in what activities the home provides.

We spoke with three members of staff who told us they felt well supported in their jobs. Staff were trained adequately for their roles and one member of staff told us "we have to read the care plans" as part of their induction.