We carried out a review of the data available to us about Albert Lodge on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Albert Lodge, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The registered manager had followed current guidance in relation to infection prevention and control. The home was open to visitors although most people chose to go out to meet their families and friends.
The registered manager had detailed care plans and risk assessments associated with COVID-19, they had consulted with people and where relevant their families when implementing them.
Robust measures in line with government guidance were in place for visitors who had easy access to hand gel throughout the home.
The registered manager and staff communicated regularly with family of people living in the home. They also had effective relationships with other professionals such as GP surgeries for the benefit of people living in the home.
The home was clean and tidy, staff followed cleaning rotas. Care staff were documenting cleaning being carried out within the home and this were checked daily by the management team to ensure it was carried out effectively. All staff ensured regular disinfection of frequently touched surfaces of the home for example, light switches and door handles.
The home was well stocked with PPE supplies. This was located at designated points throughout the home to ensure staff had access to required PPE. We observed staff donning, doffing and wearing PPE appropriately.
Staff had worked hard to support people's wellbeing during the pandemic by providing in-house activities and spent time with people to help ensure they did not feel isolated. The provider and registered manager supported staff with their well-being during the pandemic with supervision and informal chats.
There was an infection control policy and contingency plan in place that had been updated as guidance had changed.
This inspection took place on 21 August 2018 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection of the service following its registration in October 2016.
Albert Lodge provides personal care and accommodation for up to six adults with learning disabilities and mental health illness. Some people were also living with behaviours that may cause harm to themselves or others. At the time of our inspection there were five people using the service.
People living at the service were not socially excluded due to their behaviours because they were enabled to live their chosen lifestyles with intensive specialised care from staff. The service had a communal kitchen, dining/lounge room and garden.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 told us staff were extremely kind and caring, and their privacy and dignity was upheld and promoted. We received consistently positive feedback which showed us that people felt highly valued and respected.
Care and support was recorded in a very person-centred way with excellent emphasis on how people wished and needed to be supported. Staff fully involved people with support plans and care reviews. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their support was provided and staff were very respectful and understanding of people's rights and choices.
The service was exceptionally responsive to people's individual needs and wishes. This included innovative 'family work' sessions, enabling people to achieve their potential. There was a strong ethos of inclusivity that was promoted by staff. Independence was encouraged and supported with the aim of people moving on to supported living arrangements.
People were safeguarded from avoidable harm. Staff adhered to safeguarding adult’s procedures and reported any concerns to their manager and the local authority.
Staff had been recruited following safe policies and procedures, and there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to make sure people received the support they needed during the recovery process. Staff received appropriate training and support that enhanced the knowledge, values and life experience they had already gained. This included training on how to protect people from the risk of harm and on the provider’s recovery programme.
Staff assessed managed and reduced risks to people’s safety at the service and in the community. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff understood and practiced the principals of Positive Behavioural Support (PBS). A method of supporting people who display, or are at risk of displaying, behaviour which challenges.
Staff were able to recognise that harmful behaviours were also a form of communication and staff had been trained to respect how people communicated their feelings. The provider gave people the opportunity to share their views by training staff to understand people's communication styles and collecting detailed data about people’s moods, facial expressions and body language.
Safe medicines management was followed and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff protected people from the risk of infection and followed procedures to prevent and control the spread of infections.
People were supported to have choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Recovery (care) plans described the person and the level of support they required to reach their individual goals. Plans were reviewed regularly to ensure they remained an accurate record of the person and their day to day needs.
People were supported to explore new interests and gain confidence.
Staff supported people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. Staff liaised with other health and social care professionals and ensured people received effective, coordinated care with regards to any health needs.
Staff applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Mental Health Act 2007. 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. An appropriate environment was provided that met people’s needs.
People told us that the staff provided very good care and support in respect of their health and wellbeing. We saw excellent evidence of the positive impact this had on people's lives, with emphasis on the promotion of people's rights and independence. Staff and people had developed very caring, strong, meaningful relationships.
The service placed a strong emphasis on a 'person centred approach' to enrich people's lives. This meant care and support was centred on people's individual needs and wishes.
Health care professionals told us staff had an exceptional understanding of people's beliefs, values and how they wished to be supported. Feedback from those outside the home was excellent regarding all aspects of the service.
People told us they were aware of how to express concerns or make complaints and felt their comments would be listened to. People were given the opportunity to share their views about the service provided.
The feedback we received and our observations on the day of the inspection demonstrated that the home was well managed. The registered manager and staff displayed a clear vision and consistent values in relation to the provision of care and the ethos of the service. The registered manager carried out audits to ensure people were receiving the care and support they required, and to ensure the safety of the premises.
People using the service, staff and external professionals were complimentary regarding the
registered manager's leadership and the overall management of the service.
The registered manager had adhered to the requirements of their Care Quality Commission registration, submitting notifications about key events that occurred. This meant we had sufficient information to enable us to monitor the safety of the service.
An inclusive and open culture had been established and the provider welcomed feedback from staff, relatives and health and social care professionals in order to improve service delivery. A programme of audits and checks were in place to monitor the quality of the service and improvements were made where required.