Amberley House - London

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Since the last inspection there had been a change in manager. The new manager was in the process of applying for CQC registration. There had been a significant improvement in the quality of care, overall governance and engagement with people and staff. There were updated auditing processes as well as staff supervision, and care plan reviews. Staff and people were positive about the manager and felt there was a shared direction.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The owner and manager told us they were trying their best to change the culture of the home. They felt there had been significant improvements since the last inspection and wanted to make sure staff and people were fully involved. Staff were positive about the new manager and spoke of how approachable and supportive they were. Staff said, “I feel supported now. The new manager very, very good, very friendly” and “Management has changed for the better. Good communication with staff and It’s good to have a manager who listens to you.”

There was a more open culture within the home Staff told us they felt comfortable raising any concerns and felt they would be listened to. There was a shared vision to improve, the manager said they worked well with the provider to improve the quality of care. The manager had created a plan of how to ensure continuous improvement and embedding positive changes in the home. However, CQC needs to see this being embedded because if the regulatory history. This was discussed with both the manager and provider on the day if the inspection.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff were clear about the management structure of the home. Staff were complimentary of the new manager and said the manager spent a lot of time with both people and staff during the day. This helped build rapport and allowed the manager to understand how the home worked as well as people’s on-going experience of care. The manager told us they were aware there was work to do to bring the home back to a good rating which could be sustained. However, they were confident things already in place and plans for the future would achieve this.

At our last inspection we found systems were either not in place or robust enough to demonstrate safety was effectively managed. This placed people at risk of harm. This was a continued breach of Regulation 17 (Good Governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 17. There had been an improvement in the auditing processes since the last inspection. This meant the manager was able to quickly identify and address areas of concern. The manager had put several new audits in place to monitor the quality of care. However, they had been in post approximately three weeks at the time of the inspection and said they were aware there were more audits they needed to implement to ensure all areas of governance were covered. We were assured the manager understood how to monitor the quality of care effectively. The manager was aware of their regulatory responsibilities and when to report concerns and issues to CQC and the local authority. The manager had created an action plan of how to ensure continuous improvement and embedding positive changes in the home. This had been shared with the local authority and CQC. However, CQC needs to see this being embedded because of the regulatory history of the home. This was discussed with both the manager and provider on the day of the inspection and will be looked at during the next assessment.

The manager spoke of the importance of supporting staff and ensuring they felt valued. Staff were positive about the new manager and said they worked well with them. Staff said they felt able to voice their opinions and felt comfortable doing so with the manager.

At the time of the inspection, the home was under the local authority provider concerns process. This is a process where the provider meets regularly with the local authority to look at identified concerns and provide on-going support to help address this. The home had worked well with the local authority and at the time of this report, the home was being removed from the provider concerns process due to the improvements in quality of care. The local authority noted the home worked well with external healthcare professionals to ensure people’s care and support needs were met.

There were systems in place for staff to discuss their roles and share information. There was a new system for staff meetings going forward as well as staff supervision. Staff were able to talk to the manager any time and receive support.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.