Auden House Residential Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 30 June 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 12 May 2026 to the 19 May 2026.

Auden House Residential Home is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care to 24 people aged 65 and over at the time of the assessment. The service can support up to 24 people.

The service was overall safe, with a culture that encouraged openness and learning from incidents. Staff understood safeguarding responsibilities and took appropriate action to protect people from harm. Risks were assessed and managed to support people’s independence. The environment was clean, secure, and supported safe care, and infection control practices were effective. However, improvements were needed to ensure all staff completed the required levels of training and received regular supervision, together with stronger oversight for the management of medicines.

The service provided effective care, based on people’s assessed needs, which were regularly reviewed and updated. Staff worked well with healthcare professionals to deliver coordinated and evidence-based care, supporting people’s health, nutrition, and independence. People and relatives felt confident in the care provided.

The service demonstrated a strong caring approach, with staff consistently treating people with kindness, compassion, and respect. People felt comfortable, and feedback from relatives was positive. Staff knew people well and provided person-centred care that respected individual preferences, dignity, and privacy. People were supported to maintain independence and make choices about their daily lives.

The service delivering person-centred care that reflected people’s preferences and circumstances. Communication with people and their families was effective, and there were opportunities to provide feedback and be involved in decisions. The provider worked well with external services to maintain continuity of care.

The service was well led, with a positive culture supported by visible and approachable management. The registered manager responded to feedback and took action to address issues. However, governance systems were not always fully effective in identifying and addressing risks, particularly in relation to medicines and record keeping, meaning further strengthening of oversight and quality assurance processes was needed.