Abney Low Nursing home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We assessed all quality statements in the responsive 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’s care plans demonstrated people were at the centre of their care and support. People’s needs were understood by staff and people were supported to access external care provision to help ensure good continuity of care. Information was provided to people in a way in which they understood, and in line with the Accessible information standard. People were supported to provide feedback about their care and support; to help ensure they were fully involved about decisions regarding their support. People were supported to make informed decisions about their future, including end-of-life care.

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 involved in planning and making shared decisions about their care and treatment and that they experienced personalised care and support. Comments from people included, “I get a shave when I ask for one” and “I asked for my duvet cover to be changed this morning and no problem, it was changed.” People told us staff knew them well, supported them in their preferences and understood what was important to them. Comments from people included, “They [staff] understand Liverpool FC is important to me” and “[Staff member’s name] knows I like the TV, reading and crosswords.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people were fully involved with their care planning and where appropriate, any relatives or significant others. People’s care plans reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

We observed people being supported by staff in a person-centred way. For example, we observed staff assisted one person with going out at the time he wanted to. By staff sticking to the designated time, this helped to reduce the person’s anxiety, as the person was not kept waiting.

People’s experience confirmed their care was delivered in a way which met their assessed needs. People received well-coordinated and consistent care from staff who knew them well. People told us staff followed advice from external health professionals when asked, which helped to meet their assessed needs.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people enjoyed continuity of care and there was a joined-up approach to care from external services. The area manager explained how referrals for people were made as needed. For example, for skin integrity and dietary needs.

Feedback from partners confirmed there was a joined-up approach to care and support. We saw written evidence from professionals, for example, in relation to a person’s specific dietary requirements, had been incorporated into the person’s nutritional care plan. This information had also been shared with the home’s chef, so that meals could be prepared in accordance with the person’s needs.

Processes were in place to ensure when people’s care involved external services, it was delivered in a co-ordinated way which met their needs and preferences. The electronic care system enabled time responsive recording, this supported staff to document all interventions made to support tailored outstanding care.

People’s experience confirmed they were able to receive information and advice that is accurate, up-to-date and provided in a way that understood, and which met their communication needs. People told us there were kept informed about what was going on in the service.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people’s individual needs to have information in an accessible were identified, recorded, highlighted and shared. These needs were met and reviewed to support people’s care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard.

Processes were in place to ensure people’s needs to receive information were met and reviewed to support their care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard. There was an accessible information procedure in place. Polices such as safeguarding and complaints were provided to people in formats which were accessible for them.

People’s experience confirmed they knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues. People felt listened to and were able to give their views freely. People also knew who to approach if they were not happy. Relatives also told us they felt listened to. One relative made a suggestion to the home from a personal observation, and their idea was currently being trialled by the home, they confirmed, “Oh yes, I do feel listened to.”

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they actively listened and involved people. They described how they involved people using effective communication. Staff knew about the provider’s complaints procedure and were confident about dealing with a complaint. Staff explained how they involved and listened to people. Their comments included, “We always give choices and suggestions” and “Communication is key, making sure the resident understands what you are saying.” Staff knew about the complaints procedure and were confident about dealing with a complaint if one was raised with them. Their comments included, “I’d listen and reassure and try and put things right there and then. I’d let the manager know about a complaint and anything I did at the time” and “Everyone has a right to complain, and we should listen and take it seriously no matter what.”

Processes were in place to ensure people’s voices were heard, and any concerns raised were treated with compassion and as an opportunity to learn. We viewed written surveys which had been submitted by people. We saw examples of how people's responses were considered by the provider and acted on.

People’s experience confirmed they were able to access care and treatment and any external services. People were supported by staff who knew how to meet their needs. Resident meetings were held regularly and if a person could not attend a meeting, staff approached people for any feedback. One person confirmed, “Staff come and ask me before any meetings because they know I don't attend.”

Feedback from staff and leaders Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed staff supported people to access services in a timely way. Staff told us they supported people with appointments whether they took place in the home or in the community. Nursing staff explained how they made appointments and referrals and had not experienced any difficulties accessing services for people.

The service worked in conjunction with external professionals to ensure people were able to access external services. For example, we saw how the service engaged with a professional to help address a specific health need of the person.

Processes were in place to ensure people did not experience any barriers in accessing the care and support they required. People’s care records evidenced where people had accessed care from external agencies.

People’s experience confirmed they felt empowered by providers and staff to give their views and understand their rights. People told us they were not discriminated against nor judged because of their needs, and confirmed they were treated as well as everybody else.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed that although they had not faced any barriers in accessing care for people, they were not afraid to challenge any situations where this may arise.

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. Electronic care planning meant people’s care plans and profiles could be shared across a multidisciplinary team where appropriate. This helped people access the most appropriate care and support for them.

People’s experience confirmed they felt supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care. People told us staff spoke with them to help them understand their future wishes.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people were supported to make decisions about their future care. The area manager confirmed this information was managed sensitively so that people have a comfortable and dignified death. They also shared that staff had completed the ‘Six Steps Program’ to further enhance end of life care planning and intervention.

Processes were in place to ensure people had full control over their wishes for their future care, including their wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation. People's care records contained an end-of-life care plan which detailed their wishes and preferences for end-of-life care. This helped to ensure people had a dignified and pain free death. DNAR discussions were undertaken with people, their significant others and a multidisciplinary team were appropriate.