Amber House Residential Home
- Care home
- 18 beds
- No nursing
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2024
- Burton upon Trent, Staffordshire, West Midlands
Good
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
7 ratings
First rated Good in 2015, most recently Good in July 2026.
4 months
since the latest rating was published.
174 of 231
rated care homes in Staffordshire are rated Good, like this one.
Amber House Residential Home: inspection record
Rated Good in July 2026.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Compare nearby
- G James Court Residential Care Home Good, less than 0.1 miles away
- – Canal Lodge Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
- G Charlotte James Nursing Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- G Carden Bank Rest Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- G 46 Derby Road Good, 0.8 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 2 July 2026 (assessment visit 9 June 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of inspection: 10 June to 22 June 2026. This inspection took place to follow up on enforcement action from the previous inspection. The service is residential home providing personal care to older adults, some of whom may be living with dementia.
- Safe Good
- Effective Good
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to person centred care, consent, safe care and treatment, safe and effective staff and good governance. Improvements were found on this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.
Safeguarding processes had strengthened, with staff demonstrating improved understanding and prompt reporting. Risks were managed well through improved, accurate documentation. The environment was safer and better maintained. Staffing had improved but remained an area for development. Cleanliness had strengthened, supported by better organisation. Medicines management had improved, but documentation gaps showed the need for stronger oversight.
People’s needs were assessed and reviewed effectively. Care and treatment were supported by more frequent reviews and clearer, more consistent documentation. Multidisciplinary working had strengthened. People were supported to manage their health and wellbeing, although oral health recording still required improvement. The monitoring of people’s outcomes remained an area for development. Mental capacity assessments were in place, but more work was needed to ensure people who may not be able to make decisions for themselves were fully assessed.
Staff consistently showed kindness, empathy and respect, and people told us their privacy and dignity were upheld. People were supported as individuals. People were supported to maintain independence and had choice and control over how they lived and received their care. Staff responded promptly and sensitively to people’s needs. Staff felt supported, valued and confident.
People experienced person‑centred care. Care was joined‑up and flexible. People received information in formats suited to their needs. Engagement processes had improved, but not everyone was aware of opportunities to give feedback or attend meetings. People could access the care, support and treatment they needed. Better‑quality information helped staff understand diverse needs and tailor care for people at risk of inequalities. However, end‑of‑life planning remained under‑developed.
Leaders and staff shared a clearer vision. Leadership was developing, but further work was still needed to strengthen capability and consistency. People and staff felt able to speak up. Staff worked in an inclusive environment However, governance systems needed further improvement, with unclear audits and inconsistent follow-up. Although, the provider worked collaboratively with external partners and had made significant progress, improving the overall quality of care.
-
Safe
Good
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 requires improvement. The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment and safe and effective staffing. Enough improvement was found and the provider was no longer in breach of this legal regulation. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.
-
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. The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to consent to care. Enough improvement was found and the provider was no longer in breach of this legal regulation. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
-
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.
-
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 our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care. Enough improvement was found and the provider was no longer in breach of this legal regulation. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
-
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. The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance. Enough improvement was found and the provider was no longer in breach of this legal regulation. 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
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 2 July 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
- Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.
- Visit at different times of day, including a mealtime.
Registration details
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Dementia, Older People
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
- Provider
- Suba Healthcare Ltd
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 14273846 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Staffordshire County Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Staffordshire County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0300 111 8010, Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm (except bank holidays)
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Staffordshire County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Amber House Residential Home provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Amber House Residential Home as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Amber House Residential Home have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 18 beds at Amber House Residential Home.
- When was Amber House Residential Home last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Amber House Residential Home was published on 2 July 2026.
- Who runs Amber House Residential Home?
- Amber House Residential Home is run by Suba Healthcare Ltd.
- What is Amber House Residential Home's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 2 July 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01283 562674
- Address
- 7-8 Needwood Street, Burton-on-trent, DE14 2EN Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
- G James Court Residential Care Home Good, less than 0.1 miles away
- – Canal Lodge Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
- G Charlotte James Nursing Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- G Carden Bank Rest Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- G 46 Derby Road Good, 0.8 miles away