CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Allanby House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, safeguarding training, risk assessments, emergency planning and recruitment checks. They recommended stronger security for medicines and money stored in people's bedrooms.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable induction, training, supervision and appraisal. People received support with nutrition, health appointments, mobility and decisions made under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind, affectionate and respectful interactions. People appeared comfortable in their own home, and relatives spoke positively about how staff treated them.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People were supported to choose activities, go out, take holidays and receive care that reflected their needs and preferences.
- Well-led?
- Good
- There was no registered manager, but an experienced acting manager was supported by another registered manager. Inspectors found that care planning, staff support and quality monitoring continued during this period.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, well-organised care, with a recommendation to improve the security of medicines and money in bedrooms.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 December 2017. An inspector and an expert by experience met all six people living in the home, spoke with relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care records, medicines, staffing, the building, food safety and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, good risk assessments, thorough recruitment, well-managed medicines and a clean, well-maintained home.
Staff were described as kind, respectful and responsive. People had detailed care plans, access to health professionals, suitable food and a wide choice of activities. There was no registered manager at the time, but inspectors found suitable temporary management arrangements.
Inspectors recommended improving security for medicines and money kept in people's bedrooms. This was not recorded as a breach of regulations, but it is an issue the provider needed to address.
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw staff treating people with affection, empathy, dignity and respect. People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff.
“We saw a lot of other caring, affectionate and kind interactions.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans covered people's physical, emotional, psychological and social needs. Staff supported individual interests and choices, including activities linked to people's backgrounds.
“We saw a lot of activities where staff had tried to give people options and choices that they might enjoy.” from the report
Health and nutrition
People were supported to see health professionals and to eat safely and well. Staff followed professional advice, including advice about swallowing and nutrition.
“People were supported to maintain or achieve good health.” from the report
Good oversight
The provider used audits, visits, questionnaires and meetings to monitor the home. Inspectors saw evidence that improvements were made when issues were identified.
“Quality monitoring was evident in all aspects of the service with detailed audits and reports completed on a regular basis.” from the report
Bedroom storage security
needs fixingSome medicines and personal money were stored in people's bedrooms in a way inspectors felt could be more secure. The provider was reviewing and improving the arrangements.
“Some storage was not as secure as it could be.” from the report
No registered manager
minorThere was no registered manager when inspectors visited because the previous manager had left. An experienced acting manager and supporting registered manager were in place while the provider recruited.
“There was no registered manager in post but a senior support worker was leading the home with support from another registered manager.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to secure medicines and personal money in people's bedrooms?
- 02Has a registered manager now been appointed, and who is responsible for the home until then?
- 03How are people's individual activity choices and preferences recorded and reviewed?
- 04How do staff make sure professional advice about swallowing, nutrition and health is followed?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, and how are complaints recorded and reviewed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC areas and the care and premises of the home; the provider could not complete its Provider Information Return because of technical problems. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 January 2018 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 Allanby House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 December 2010.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.