Albert Suites at Battersea Place

“We undertook this inspection to check the provider had improved and followed the action plan we required them to complete after we had identified issues with the way the care home was managed at their last CQC inspection. This was because they did not have a registered manager in post which had negatively affected staff morale and the effectiveness of how they operated their governance systems. Consequently, we rated the care home good overall at their last inspection [published 25 October 2022] but requires improvement for the key question, Is the service well-led?”

“This inspection was unannounced and conducted by 2 adult social care inspectors and supported by a regulatory coordinator. We reviewed 22 quality statements in relation to the 3 key questions, Is the service safe, responsive, and well-led? For all the other key questions which were not reviewed as part of this inspection we used the ratings awarded at their last inspection to calculate the overall rating.”

“Based on the findings of this inspection we continue to rate the care home good overall and have changed their rating for the well-led key question from requires improvement to good. This was because we found the care home had improved how it was now managed and operated their governance systems.”

“The service had continued to experience high levels of management turnover in recent years and remained without a registered manager. However, a suitably experienced and qualified manager had been appointed in the last 12 months, and they have now applied to be registered with us as the manager of both Albert Suites care home and Battersea Place home care and supported living services.”

“People were treated with kindness and compassion. The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training to maintain good-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.”

“People participated in decisions about their care. The service provided information that people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and support. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People engaged in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.”

“Managers and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Managers were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers collaborated with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement.”

“ ”