CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Albion Court Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding, risk assessments were in place, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to provide assistance.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and supported people's health, nutrition and specific needs. Inspectors found improvements in meeting people's cultural dietary preferences.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and caring, respected people's privacy and dignity, and supported independence. People and families were involved in care planning and decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs, backgrounds and preferences and were reviewed regularly. People were supported with activities, communication, relationships and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- There was no registered manager in post as required by law. Audits had improved and were driving improvements, but management and leadership were still judged inconsistent.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home required improvement in leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 05 March 2020. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, personalised care plans, kind staff and support for people's cultural, religious and communication needs.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. There was no registered manager in post as required by law, although the current manager was applying for registration. Management audits had improved and were helping to improve the service.
The overall rating was Good. This was an improvement from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, and the earlier breach of regulation had been resolved.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that staff understood safeguarding and people's risks. Medicines were stored, recorded and given safely.
“Medicines administration records showed people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff also supported people to remain independent.
“We observed staff knocked and asked permission before entering a person's bedroom.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's backgrounds, preferences and desired outcomes. Staff supported cultural, religious and communication needs.
“These contained information on people's background, likes and preferences and clearly recorded outcomes people would like to achieve.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home did not have a registered manager, although the current manager was applying for registration. This was the main reason leadership was rated Requires Improvement.
“There was no registered manager in post as required by law.” from the report
- 01Has the current manager's application for registration been completed, and who is responsible for the home while it is being processed?
- 02How are the improved audits used to identify and fix problems, and can families see what actions have been completed?
- 03How will you make sure people's cultural and religious food preferences continue to be met?
- 04How are people and relatives involved in care planning, reviews and decisions about activities?
- 05How do you make sure staff have the training and guidance needed for each person's specific health and care needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with follow-up checks after the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 March 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, March 2019
Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care, but improvements were still needed in effectiveness, personalisation and management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 February 2019, with a second visit on 12 February. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They also reviewed care records, staff records and management information.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Caring. Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm, staff were suitable and trained, medicines were generally given safely, and people were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective, Responsive and Well-led. Menus did not fully reflect people's cultural backgrounds, the building did not fully meet people's needs, care plans were not always person-centred, and quality checks had not led to improvements quickly enough.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, the same as at the previous inspection. Safe and Caring improved from Requires Improvement to Good, but the other three ratings remained Requires Improvement.
People were kept safe
Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk management and medicine systems. Staff knew how to respond to possible abuse or harm.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Legal requirements were met” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and friendly. Staff supported people's choices, dignity, privacy and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had training suited to their roles and said they could discuss concerns and changing needs with managers and senior staff.
“Staff told us, and records confirmed, they were supported through training and guidance to provide effective care for people.” from the report
Healthcare support
Staff understood people's health needs and contacted healthcare professionals when needed. Records showed communication with healthcare services about people's care.
“We saw records that showed when healthcare professionals had been contacted in support of people's health.” from the report
Known improvements were delayed
seriousThe provider had identified problems with menus and the environment at the previous inspection, but these had not been fully resolved.
“The providers systems had not been effective at improving the quality of the service.” from the report
The environment was not fully adapted
needs fixingThere were still limited pictures, orientation prompts and suitable signage across parts of the home. This could make it harder for people to recognise and use their surroundings.
“At this inspection we found only limited improvements been made.” from the report
Food choices did not reflect residents' backgrounds
needs fixingThe weekly menu offered only one Afro Caribbean meal option even though 38% of residents had an Afro Caribbean heritage. Extra options were added during the inspection.
“Menus did not fully reflect the cultural heritage of people; at the time of the inspection 38% of people living at Albion Court were of Afro Caribbean heritage” from the report
Care was not always personalised
needs fixingStaff could describe people's preferences, but inspectors saw that staff were sometimes more focused on tasks. Care plans also needed to reflect people's choices and preferred support more fully.
“Care plans were updated and reviewed as required but could be improved to be more person centred” from the report
Confidential records were left in a corridor
minorSome care folders containing personal information were stored outside people's rooms in a communal area. Managers said this would be addressed immediately after the inspection.
“We found a number of care folders containing personal information, were being stored outside people's rooms, in the communal corridor.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the menus, including options reflecting residents' cultural backgrounds?
- 02What improvements have been completed to signage, pictures and orientation prompts across the home?
- 03How are care plans now checked to make sure they reflect each person's choices and preferred way of receiving support?
- 04What activities are now available for people living with dementia?
- 05Who is currently managing the home, and how are you checking that improvements are completed promptly?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, with visits on 7 and 12 February 2019; inspectors spoke with 17 people, eight relatives and staff, and reviewed care and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 March 2019 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 Albion Court Care Centre
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 March 2017.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.