CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Albemarle Hall Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with several minor issues addressed after the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 November 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living there, visitors, staff and a healthcare professional. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, training, recruitment and quality checks.
The home was caring and well organised. Staff kept people safe, treated them with kindness and respected their privacy. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People received support with medicines, food, drink, healthcare, activities and end of life wishes.
Inspectors found some areas that needed attention. These included using the same hoist sling for four people, sparse communal areas, a meal setting that lacked prompts, and some communication and orientation aids that were not being used. The home provided evidence after the inspection that most of these points had been addressed.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 21 June 2017.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough suitably qualified staff and saw medicines being given safely. Staff training and medicine checks were in place.
“Appropriate numbers of suitably qualified staff were on duty to meet people's needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans covered people's health, routines, preferences and how they wanted support to be given. Staff knew people's likes and dislikes.
“Plans of care seen were comprehensive and covered areas such as the person's general health and wellbeing, their sleeping patterns and how they wanted their care and support to be delivered.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives experienced caring relationships. Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence.
“People using the service and their relatives experienced positive caring relationships with the staff team.” from the report
Good involvement and management
People, relatives and staff were asked for their views through meetings, surveys and day to day conversations. The manager worked with other professionals to support people's care.
“People using the service, their relatives and the staff team had been involved in how the service was run and their view's and thoughts were regularly sought.” from the report
Hoist sling infection risk
seriousThe same sling was used when four people were moved with a hoist. Inspectors raised this as an infection control risk, and the home said additional slings had been bought afterwards.
“We did note when staff supported four people to move using a hoist, the same sling was used. This posed an infection control risk.” from the report
Sparse communal areas
minorSome shared areas looked stark and sterile and lacked homely comforts. The home said it had bought picture canvases and was sourcing local pictures after the inspection.
“We did note the communal areas of the service were rather sparse and sterile and lacking homely comforts.” from the report
Communication and orientation aids
needs fixingVisual aids were not used at the meal observed, the menu was difficult to read and there was little stimulation or orientation information. The home said staff were reminded and visual cues were sourced.
“We also noted whilst there was a notice board displaying the meals for the day, this was difficult to read.” from the report
Quality checks missed some issues
needs fixingEnvironmental and equipment audits had not identified all the issues found during the inspection. The manager was asked to address this.
“We did note these audits had not picked up the issues identified during our inspection.” from the report
- 01What extra hoist slings are now available, and how do you make sure each sling is cleaned or changed between people?
- 02What changes have been made to the communal areas, and how do you check that they remain comfortable and personalised?
- 03How are tablecloths, cutlery, condiments and other mealtime prompts used for every meal?
- 04How do staff use visual aids, readable menus and orientation cues for people who need them?
- 05How have quality audits been changed so that they identify problems before an inspection?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that assessed all five CQC questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 January 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Albemarle Hall Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited without warning on 16 May 2017. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and the manager. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, training records and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, support with food and health, respectful care, activities and systems to monitor quality.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement in November 2015. This inspection found that improvements had been made, including better staffing and more reliable access to drinks for people in their rooms.
Enough staff
Inspectors found that staff were available when people needed help. This was an improvement from the previous inspection.
“People received the care and support they needed in a timely way.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and managed safely. Staff had training and their competence was checked before they administered medicines.
“We found the storage and management of medicines were organised and that people received their medicines when they should.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people’s preferences and communicated in a gentle and respectful way. People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence.
“We observed staff interactions with people and we saw staff were kind and caring to people when they were supporting them.” from the report
Activities and personal choices
People could take part in activities, follow their interests and access the community. Their care plans included their preferences and how they wanted to spend their day.
“People were supported to follow their interests and take part in social activities.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The management team checked areas such as medicines, fire safety, care records, accidents and incidents. Problems found during daily checks were recorded and acted on.
“There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Resident meetings had paused
minorMeetings for people living in the home had not taken place for some time because people did not attend. The manager said they would seek views in other ways and record them.
“The registered manager told us the meetings had not taken place for some time as people did not attend” from the report
- 01How do you currently seek and record the views of people living in the home if resident meetings do not take place?
- 02How many staff are on duty on each shift, and how do you adjust staffing when people’s needs change?
- 03How are medicines checked to make sure they are given at the right time and stored safely?
- 04How are relatives involved in monthly care reviews and told about changes in a person’s health or support needs?
- 05What activities and support are available for a person’s individual interests and access to the community?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five CQC questions, carried out to check whether improvements had been made since November 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Albemarle Hall Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 March 2014.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.