• Care Home
  • Care home

Aldercar Residential Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

36 Wood Lane, Hucknall, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG15 6LR (0115) 963 7797

Provided and run by:
Ania Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 17 January 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by two inspectors, an assistant inspector and an expert by experience who had experience of caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type:

Aldercar Residential Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 29 November 2018.

What we did:

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We also considered the last inspection report and information that had been sent to us by other agencies. We also contacted commissioners who had a contract with the service.

During the inspection, we spoke with seven people who used the service, one relative and a friend of two other people who used the service. The registered manager was away on the day of the inspection, but we spoke with a care manager, a senior care worker and three care workers. We also spoke with a visiting health professional.

We looked at the care records of seven people who used the service. We saw how staff supported people throughout the day. We looked at records in relation to the management of the service and how the premises were maintained, including fire safety.

Overall inspection


Updated 17 January 2019

What life is like for people using this service:

People were supported with their nutritional needs however, we made a recommendation about improving people's meal time experience.

People told us they enjoyed their food. Their comments included, “meals are very good,” “I like some [meals] but don’t like others,” “the meals are quite nice but I could do with more to eat” and “the food is lovely.”

People continued to receive safe care. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report incidents of harm or concern. Risk assessments were in place to manage potential risks within people’s lives, whilst also promoting their independence.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service.

Safe staffing levels were in place to meet people's needs. A staff member told us, “There are always cover arrangements in place and staffing is not an issue here.”

There were procedures in place for evacuating people with limited mobility who were in the event of an emergency, such as a fire.

Infection control procedures were in place that were based on a Code of Practice on the prevention and control of infections. The premises, including communal areas and people rooms, were clean and fresh.

Staff members had training that provided them with knowledge they needed to perform their roles. The management team supported staff to put their training into practice. A staff member told us, “The training has really helped me to understand each person's needs and to treat everybody differently. I know about their history and their needs and then use the knowledge [from training] to provide better care.”

Staff obtained people's consent before they provided care and support. People gave consent for the use of bed rails to prevent them falling from their beds. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People participated in a wide range of meaningful and stimulating activities.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. People told us that staff were polite and that they had a good relationship with them. Care plans reflected people’s likes and dislikes, and staff spoke with people in a friendly manner, addressing them by their preferred name. We saw positive and friendly interactions between staff and people, though at times when staff were at their most busy in one dining room they were more task orientated.

Staff supported people’s independence. A person told us, “Since I have got here I have a lot more independence.” For most people this meant that they were encouraged to do more for themselves, though support was available if it was needed. A person told us, “I know help is nearby if I need it.”

People, or if needed their relatives, were involved in the planning of care and could contribute to the way in which they were supported. People and their relatives were involved in reviewing their care and making any necessary changes if they wanted.

Care plans were detailed and included information about the support people required.

People knew how to raise any complaints or concerns. These were acted upon promptly.

The service continued to be well managed. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Actions were taken and improvements were made when required.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 24 May 2016).

About the service: Aldercar Residential Care Home is a care home that was providing personal care to 21 older people at the time of the inspection.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme.