Archived: Abbotsbury

Updated 14 August 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 17 and 18 July 2018 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the home. This included the statutory notifications sent to us by the provider about incidents and events that had occurred at the service and other intelligence the Care Quality Commission had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law.

The provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. We used all of this information to plan how the inspection should be conducted.

During the inspection we spoke with eight people who lived at the home and two visitors. We also spoke with five members of staff; including the registered manager, Home Manager, the cook, and two care staff.

We look at the care records for three people, the staffing rota, accident and incident records, four staff files and records relevant to the quality monitoring and management of the service. We also looked around the home and observed care and support and people's interactions with staff members.

Updated 14 August 2018

The inspection took place on 17 and 18 July 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced. This meant that the provider and staff did not know we were coming.

Abbotsbury is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Abbotsbury accommodates 21 people in one adapted building. The detached accommodation is a large three storey building with 21 single bedrooms. Shared living areas include three lounges and a dining room. Measures are in place to support access to the building for people who are wheelchair users or who have limited mobility. At the time of our inspection there were 16 people living in the home.

There was a registered manager in post who also registered manager for another home owned by the registered provider. ‘A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.’ Day to day running of the home was the responsibility of the Home Manager.

Everyone who lived in the home said they felt safe. There were robust measures in place to ensure people were safe. Risk assessments were in place for areas such as pressure care, safe environment, falls and mobility, and nutrition and hydration.

There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs. Staff rotas showed a consistent number of staff were on duty each day. People told us call bells were answered within a reasonable time.

Staff had been appropriately recruited to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. We found that staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people effectively and safely. Staff were supported by the manager through regular supervisions, annual appraisal and regular training. Staff had attended training in subjects such as first aid, fire safety, food safety, safeguarding and medication. New staff were required to complete an induction. Staff meetings were held regularly.

Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff had been trained to administer medicines to ensure errors were kept to a minimum.

The home was very clean and there were no odours. The home was well maintained and in good decorative order. Regular checks and tests, such as gas, electricity, water safety, fire drills, fire alarm tests and external checks of firefighting equipment, were completed to maintain safety in the home.

People's needs were assessed and reviewed regularly to reflect their current health and support needs. People were supported to maintain healthy lives; records showed that people were supported to attend medical appointments.

Where possible staff enabled people to make their own decisions and we observed staff obtaining verbal consent from people. Staff understood and complied with The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and where people lacked capacity to consent we saw that mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were recorded.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet and meet their dietary requirements. Drinks were offered at various times throughout the day to ensure people's hydration needs were met. Staff understood people's individual nutrition and hydration needs and we saw that meals were provided accordingly.

Everyone living in the home was very complementary about the attitude of the staff and the way they were treated. We observed staff speaking kindly to people; they were very patient with people and approached people with a smile. Staff seemed to know people well and their likes and dislikes. Staff understood people's different communication needs. They supported people to make decisions about their care, support and treatment as far as possible. Records showed people's preferred routines, likes and dislikes.

There was a complaints policy in place, which was displayed in the home. People living in the home told us they had never had to complain about anything. No complaints had been received since the last inspection.

People told us they were satisfied with the activities provided. There were a range of activities available which people could choose to take part if they wished, such as, music therapy, exercises, crafts and musical entertainers were provided.

Quality assurance audits were completed by the managers and senior staff which included, medication and health and safety.

There was a process completed every six months, where people in the home and their relatives had the opportunity to voice their opinions about the service. Resident and relatives’ meetings were held to enable people to meet regularly.

People and relatives were positive about the management of the service. They told us they were in regular contact with the staff and the registered manager, who was very approachable and were always kept up to date. Staff were positive about the support they received from the management team.

There was a caring, person-centred, and open culture in the home. The registered manager and registered provider met their legal requirements with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). They had submitted notifications and the ratings from the last inspection were clearly displayed in the home.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.