Abney Low Nursing home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We assessed all quality statements in the caring key question and found areas of good practice. The assessment of this key question found improved practice since the last inspection, our rating for this key question has improved to good. People told us and we observed people being treated by staff with care, compassion and in a way which respected both their independence and privacy. People’s protected characteristics were respected and not viewed as a barrier to the care and treatment they required. Staff told us they enjoyed their jobs and felt supported in their role by the provider.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s experience confirmed they felt staff treated them with kindness and dignity. People told us they felt staff listened to them and understood not only their needs, but their preferences too. People were able to maintain important relationships with family and friends. One person told us, “Friends come in now and again, and my sister visits every week.” A relative had left written feedback about the care of their loved one, “Staff have restored my faith in humanity and human kindness.” Another relative stated, “I can't thank the staff and the team at Anchorage enough for their hard work and dedication and will never forget the kindness and compassion shown to me throughout the entire period of [Person’s Name] passing.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed staff knew and understood the people they supported, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories and backgrounds. Staff told us they loved working at the home and enjoyed spending time with people. Comments included, “We care so much about the residents, it is a pleasure to support them and to work here” and “They [the people who lived at the home] are the best part of the job, they are just fab."

Feedback from an external healthcare partner described staff as being ‘extremely hard working and a credit to their organisation.’

We observed people being supported with kindness, dignity and respect. We saw how staff showed compassion to help reduce a person’s anxiety, by talking with them gently and holding their hand.

People’s experience confirmed staff treated them as individuals and that their preferences for care and support were listened to and acted upon. One person told us, “If you are asleep they [staff] will leave you.” Another told us, “My duvet is over the top of the bottom of the bed, normally they are tucked in but I don't like that, I ask them [staff] to leave it out and cover the foot board and they do.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people’s individual needs and preferences were understood and were reflected in their care, treatment and support. The area manager explained how care plans had been rewritten since the last inspection to incorporate rich person-centred detail.

We observed people being supported by staff in a way which met their unique needs. We observed staff communicating with a person using a pad and pen which was on a bedside table in reach of the person. This method was used as the person had a hearing impairment.

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s communication needs were met to enable them to engage in their care, treatment and support to maximise their experience and outcomes. People’s care plans contained a plan of care detailing how that person best communicated with staff. Care plans also contained information about peoples’ personal, cultural, religious needs. This helped to ensure people's individual needs and wishes were respected.

People’s experience confirmed staff respected their independence and they could make day to day decisions. Staff respected what people could do for themselves and supported them when needed. One person told us, “I shave myself and feed myself.” Relatives told us people’s choices were respected and there were no restrictions on visiting and taking their family member out. One relative told us, “We take [Name] out, there are no restrictions, and I can bring [Name] a can of beer. We had our 30th anniversary and celebrated here and [Name] had a couple of beers that day!”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people had choice and control over their own care and were empowered to make decisions about their care. The area manager told us how important it was for staff to ‘give as much choice to people as we can’ with regards to their care and support.

We observed people’s independence and outcomes being maximised by the use of a range of appropriate equipment to support their needs, for example, lifting hoists, walking frames and wheelchairs. Staff were observed making sure people had the correct standing equipment before supporting them to mobilise. We observed people being communicated with in a way they understood. Staff sat close to people when speaking with them and maintained eye contact.

Processes were in place to help ensure the care and support people received reflected their needs and their right to choose. People’s care records promoted their independence, helping to ensure people were cared for and supported in a dignified way. For example, one person’s personal care plan directed staff to encourage and maintain the person’s independence by having them wash their face and the upper part of their torso. This helped the person to feel more in control of their care and helped to reduce their anxiety. We also saw how a person was regularly supported by staff to access the community, such as going out for breakfast, as this was something the person looked forward to.

People’s experience confirmed staff treated their needs, views, wishes and comfort as a priority. Although people confirmed they always had access to their call bell, when asked about the timeliness of staff answering them, feedback was mixed. Comments included, “I have to wait longer if short staffed,” “Staff come after a couple of goes” and “Sometimes they [staff] come quick, it depends on what they are doing.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they were able to respond to people’s needs in a timely way. One staff member told us, “There is enough of us on shift so that no one is waiting long for help once they ring their buzzer."

We observed staff being able to recognise when people needed help and support. Staff were observed responding quickly to call bells and people’s requests for support. We observed a person who was in bed calling for assistance and staff responded to their request right away. We observed staff regularly checked on people’s comfort. We observed staff asking people throughout the day if they were comfortable and if they had enough to eat and drink.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people received safe and effective care as the provider recognised and met the well-being needs of staff. People benefited from staff who had regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service. Staff told us they liked the leadership at the home and felt listened to and valued. Comments from staff included, “The home is well run. I have some commitments outside work, and [Manager’s name] helps me to ensure I am included in team meetings around my other personal commitments, so I don't miss out.” Another staff member said, “I feel valued. The management let us know they appreciate us, which I think is good.”

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s experience of the service was driven by a culture that normalised good well-being through inclusivity, active listening, and open conversations. The provider regularly collated feedback from staff in the form of surveys, and supervision and appraisal processes. Staff were also encouraged during team meetings to feedback any outstanding issues.