Albury House

Inspectors found there were enough staff on duty to care for people safely.

“There were enough staff on duty to provide care to people.” from the report

People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors saw staff who knew people's needs and provided person-centred support.

“People and relatives spoke positively about the care they received. We observed staff giving people person-centred care.” from the report

People were supported to eat and drink enough. Staff worked with healthcare professionals and responded when people became unwell.

“People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health.” from the report

Communication with healthcare partners had improved since the previous inspection, and visiting professionals said staff followed their advice.

“The communication from the home has improved in the past few months.” from the report

The provider had not made enough progress after the previous inspection. Similar problems continued in recruitment, records, consent procedures and regulatory compliance.

“The provider had not taken adequate action since the last inspection to make improvements to the service.” from the report

Some risks were not fully assessed or acted on. Checks on lifting equipment were overdue by several months, and fire evacuation plans were not always in place.

“Essential checks on lifting equipment were overdue by several months.” from the report

Up-to-date DBS checks were not available for staff, so inspectors could not be sure that staff were safe to work with vulnerable people.

“This meant we could not be sure that staff working at the service were not barred from working with vulnerable people.” from the report

The home did not complete required capacity assessments or record best-interest decisions. Claimed deprivation of liberty applications had not been received or authorised by the local authority.

“Staff had made decisions about people's care for them.” from the report

Care records lacked person-centred detail, and medicines records and care plans did not always agree. Inspectors could not be sure that medicine problems were being identified and acted on.

“There were discrepancies between medicines administration records and medicine care plans.” from the report

Staff had not received training in the Mental Capacity Act, learning disabilities or autism. Required staff supervisions were also not taking place regularly.

“The provider did not always make sure staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and support.” from the report