Abney Low Nursing home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed all quality statements in the effective 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 were involved in the assessment of their needs. People’s care was planned with their involvement, in line with best practice guidelines. People were supported to maintain their nutrition and hydration needs and had choice over what they ate and drank. Staff worked effectively with outside agencies to help meet people’s individual needs and support them to live healthier lives. People’s care was regularly monitored to help lead to good outcomes. People’s rights around their consent to care and treatment were respected and aligned with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.

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 their needs were understood and met. People told us their needs had been assessed to ensure they received the right care and support. People told us their care plan was discussed with them. One person confirmed, “I did one [care plan review] 2 weeks ago.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people’s needs were assessed and reviewed regularly. The area manager told us how people were actively involved in the review of their needs, “We have a mid-week mingle and sit with people. We listen to them and ask about their needs and preferences. We are aware this can change all the time.”

Processes were in place to ensure staff understood and managed people’s needs. Peoples’ care records evidenced their individual needs had been assessed. Assessments were regularly reviewed and up to date. Care records contained detailed guidance for staff to follow.

People’s experience confirmed they received support which was relevant to their needs and were informed when a referral had been made to external services. One person told us “They [staff] also get in touch with my daughter.” People had access to nutritious food and drinks. People had choice over what they wanted to eat and drink. People told us they enjoyed the food, one person told us, “I’ve had a lovely roast dinner, I'm bloated!”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they knew how to support people in line with their needs, including their nutrition and hydration needs. One member of staff told us, “We are kept up to date from care plans and daily notes.” The chef was able to describe people’s dietary needs and preferences.

Processes were in place which demonstrated people’s needs had been identified. People’s care records evidenced their needs had been assessed on their admission to the service and continued to be reviewed and amended according to people’s changing needs.

People’s experience confirmed how staff had all the relevant information to ensure their care was planned. People told us staff worked well together. People were supported to access external appointments as required. One person told us, “When I go to the hospital, staff arrange this for me.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they were involved in people’s care planning and support. Staff were able to describe when referrals were needed to other healthcare providers such as SALT (Speech and Language Therapy) to enable people to remain safe while living at the home. One staff member told us, “I would report any changes in people’s behaviours to the nurse in charge, who would then make the appropriate referrals.”

Feedback from partners confirmed how they were actively involved in the planning of people’s care to ensure it aligned with their needs. We saw written evidence of external health professionals responding to referrals which had been made for people.

Processes were in place to ensure people were referred to external healthcare professionals when needed. Processes helped people develop relationships with professionals to ensure best advice was sought and to help ensure people were supported to make decisions to further enhance their choice and control over their care.

People’s experience confirmed they were supported by staff to manage their needs in a way in which they preferred and told us they were supported to remain active. One person confirmed, “I can do chair exercises if I want.” People were supported with their health conditions. One person said of his ailment, “They [staff] keep an eye on it.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people were involved in planning their own care. The area manager explained how staff discussed and documented decisions with people by discussing the care with the person or acting in the person’s best interests.

Processes were in place to enable people to make informed decisions around their own well-being needs. People’s care records evidenced that their families and friends were included in their care planning, in discussing their life stories, individual preferences, likes and dislikes.

People’s experience confirmed they experienced positive outcomes with regards to the care and support. People told us they were happy living at the home. One person said, “Peace and quiet here and I like that, I have a nice quiet room, I have the best one.” Another person told us, “Staff are really good, nothing is too much trouble for them and even agency are really nice.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they completed people’s daily notes and took part in their reviews to ensure any areas of their care which required improving were addressed.

Processes were in place to ensure peoples outcomes were monitored, and any changes were implemented. This was evidenced in peoples’ care plan reviews. Care plans were audited to ensure regular reviews took place and any actions were followed up.

People’s experience confirmed they understood their rights around choosing care and support. People told us their consent was gained prior to commencing support and they had a choice how they lived their lives. Information about care and treatment was provided to people in a way they understood. Relatives told us people’s right to consent was respected, one explained, “When going to wash and get [Name] out of bed they always ask and tell [Name] what they are going to do next.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they provided care in a way which aligned to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act, and how information was provided to people in a way they understood. Staff were able to explain how they gained consent from people including people who did not communicate verbally. Comments from staff included, “If people can't consent, their ability to discuss different decisions is assessed” and “We have one person who cannot verbally consent, however they can understand what we say, so we communicate by writing notes.”

Processes were in place to ensure people’s choices, consent and rights around their care and support were respected. Capacity assessments were in place in people’s care records. Where people were not able to consent, a DoLS (Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard) had been applied for appropriately. All conditions on people’s DoLS had been reviewed and recorded, and any DoLS had been appropriately re-assessed and applied for before they expired.