- Care home
Allambie House
Report from 23 September 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of inspection: 23 September to 8 October 2025. Allambie House is a care home providing accommodation and personal care. It is registered to provide care for up to 30 people, of which a number of beds are part of a 'Discharge to Assess' (D2A) scheme. The D2A scheme aims to ensure people are moved out of hospital to receive a period of rehabilitation/re-ablement in a community setting prior to assessment of their long-term care needs.
This inspection was completed to follow up on action we told the previous provider to take at the last inspection in December 2024. At that inspection, the provider was found to be in breach of 2 legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, and good governance. Warning notices were issued. At this inspection, we found sufficient improvement had been made to address the actions needed. The requirements of the warning notices were met, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.
At the time of our inspection visit on 6 October 2025 there were 23 people living at the home. Some people living at Allambie House had a learning disability. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. The service was meeting the underpinning principles for ‘Right support, right care, right culture’
During the inspection we spoke with people who lived at the service, a relative, staff, the managers, the nominated individual and other partner organisations. The provider had implemented new audits and checks to demonstrate better oversight of the service, but some improvement was required to ensure information and guidance was consistently embedded in practice. There continued to be some records, including those related to medicine management, that needed further improvement.
We observed some positive interactions between people and staff. On the day of our visit, there were sufficient levels of care staff to support people’s day to day needs. Staff offered people choices in day-to-day decisions such as food and drink. Staff understood how to maintain good hygiene to prevent the spread of infection but there were some areas needing attention such as furniture and equipment. Arrangements were in place for daily cleaning of the home.
Staff completed training relevant to their roles to keep their skills and practice updated; however, some staff were unclear on actions to follow in a fire or emergency evacuation of the home.
There had been changes in the management team since the last inspection. This included a new deputy manager and new manager. The provider also had management consultants working at the home with the staff team to help make improvements to the service. The new manager was not registered with us. However, the newly appointed manager told us they had recently applied to CQC for registration. Managers worked well with external teams to ensure people received the right care at the right time. It was evident there had been improvements made since the last inspection, and the management team were committed to further ongoing improvements. Where accidents and incidents took place, managers reviewed them to identify trends to identify any learning from them.
People's experience of this service
People spoke positively about the service. Overall, risks to people’s health and safety were identified and managed. People and their relatives told us people felt safe and at ease with the staff that supported them. They said staff were usually available when they needed them and people felt supported by staff to meet their needs. Where possible, people were encouraged to make their own decisions about how they lived their life. This included some choices about how they spent their day. People were offered opportunities to enjoy gentle exercise to support their independence and mobility. They had choices of what they wanted to eat and enjoyed their meals. When people had restrictions in their care plans to keep them safe, applications to deprive them of their liberty had been submitted in accordance with legislative requirements and those with conditions were being met. People and relatives told us they were happy with the standards of care. Comments included: “It’s nice. The staff look after me," “It’s all right, its good,” and “From my experience, they are very good.”