Rated Care Homes

Alban House Residential Care Home

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 6 ratings

    Rated Requires improvement at every inspection since 2017.

  • 8 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 28 of 283

    rated care homes in Devon are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Alban House Residential Care Home: inspection record

Care home, 23 beds, Devon

Rated Requires improvement in February 2026.

Alban House Residential Care Home: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Edenmore Nursing Home (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and Hilldales Residential Care Home (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Edenmore Nursing Home Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    Hilldales Residential Care Home Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Seaview Haven Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
  4. G
    Susan Day Residential Home Good, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Belmont Grange Limited Good, 0.4 miles away

See all care homes in Devon

See all care homes in Ilfracombe

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 19 February 2026 (assessment visit 8 December 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment:16 December 2025 to 19 January 2026. We visited the service on 16, 17 and 18 December 2025. Alban House is a residential care home providing care and support to a maximum of 23 older people. At the time of our assessment there were 14 people living at the home.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

The assessment was carried out to follow up on the breaches in legal regulation. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, the need for consent, person-centred care, dignity and respect, staffing and good governance.Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

Staff were increasingly adopting a proactive culture regarding health and safety incidents or concerns. However, further work was needed to ensure all concerns were reported and recorded appropriately to ensure people’s safety. This work needed embedding and sustaining in practice.

People’s individual risks were being identified more effectively, and the necessary risk assessment reviews were increasingly carried out to keep people safe. However, further embedding of risk management processes was needed to continually drive improvements in the way staff managed people’s risks. Professionals confirmed improvements had been made with how the service managed people’s identified risks.

The provider undertook regular health and safety checks of the premises as part of their auditing system. This demonstrated closer attention was being paid to the safety of the premises. These improvements needed sustaining and embedding in practice. Fire safety management had improved and protected people and others within the building. Further work was being undertaken to ensure all fire doors were compliant with fire safety regulations. Safety systems and equipment used at the service were maintained and serviced at regular intervals to make sure these remained in good order and safe for use.

The provider had invested in the premises and further investment was planned to ensure people’s individual needs could be met by the adaptation, design, and decoration of the premises.

Infection control practices had improved and there were now measures to ensure people’s safety. Staff followed improved systems and processes to administer, record and store medicines safely. These improvements needed to continue to be sustained and embedded in practice.

Staff were more effectively deployed across the home, so people’s care and support needs could be met in a timely manner. This needed sustaining and embedding in practice to ensure consistency in approach.

Staff were deployed in line with people’s assessed care and support needs. Where additional staff were needed, as far as possible, consistent agency staff were utilised to support continuity of care. The provider had now made sure night staff had received training in how to support people with their medicines, to enable people to access their medicines when required during the night.

On reviewing the staff training matrix, it was evident there were gaps across mandatory training modules. Staff training remained one of the provider’s priorities to ensure staff were equipped with the knowledge and skills to support people in a person-centred way.

The management team were establishing a more effective framework to ensure all performance and conduct issues were formally documented and managed in line with policies and procedures to protect the quality and safety of people’s care and support. For example, addressing any poor staff practice through disciplinaries, with actions taken to mitigate future risks. This work needed sustaining and embedding in practice.

Improvements had been made to how the provider assessed, monitored and improved the quality and safety of the service. Risks were increasingly being mitigated, and governance systems identified areas where improvements were needed. For example, to infection control, medicines management, the safety of the premises and work required to people’s individual care and support plans and risk assessments. These systems and processes needed embedding and sustaining within the service.

The service’s service improvement plan evidenced extensive work undertaken to ensure people received safe, effective and high quality care. This, and positive collaboration with health and social care professionals, including the local authority, demonstrated the provider’s goal to deliver equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. This work needed to continue to be sustained and embedded in practice.

This service has been in Special Measures since 10 September 2025. The provider demonstrated improvements that have been made. The service is no longer rated as inadequate in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 19 February 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 19 February 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Isaac Kirby
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, People detained under the Mental Health Act, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

8 inspection reports, latest 24 February 2022. Latest assessment published 19 February 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
03641121 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Devon County Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Alban House Residential Care Home provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Alban House Residential Care Home as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Alban House Residential Care Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 23 beds at Alban House Residential Care Home.
When was Alban House Residential Care Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Alban House Residential Care Home was published on 19 February 2026.
Who runs Alban House Residential Care Home?
Alban House Residential Care Home is run by Alban Quality Care Limited.
What is Alban House Residential Care Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 19 February 2026.

Contact

Phone
01271 863217
Address
8-10 Apsley Terrace, Ilfracombe, EX34 9JU Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Edenmore Nursing Home (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and Hilldales Residential Care Home (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Edenmore Nursing Home Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    Hilldales Residential Care Home Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Seaview Haven Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
  4. G
    Susan Day Residential Home Good, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Belmont Grange Limited Good, 0.4 miles away

See all care homes in Devon

See all care homes in Ilfracombe