Abbeyfield Lear House

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their 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.

The provider ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment decisions, and worked in partnership with individuals, their families, and relevant professionals when responding to changes in people’s needs.
Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of person-centred care and were observed putting these principles into practice. Interactions between staff and people were warm, respectful, and meaningful. Staff clearly knew individuals well and took time to celebrate their achievements. One person told us, “I am very happy here. Everyone is very kind,” and a staff member said, “We know them all so well, they are like family.” Family members spoke positively about their involvement in care. Comments included, “I am involved in all aspects of the care planning” and “I have been involved in all decisions and care planning right from the beginning.”
 

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. For example, Staff had a good understanding of the health and social care needs of the people they supported. We received feedback from professionals indicating that leaders promoted a coordinated approach to care and support, working closely with family members. Many family members told us they felt involved in all aspects of their relative’s care. Comments included, “When [Relative] was moving in, the focus was on getting [Relative] there and settled and seeing to care needs first” and “We can visit any time.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
The provider was not always responsive to people’s individual needs prior to admission. Not all people had a completed pre-admission assessment. This meant the provider could not consistently demonstrate people’s needs, preferences, and potential risks were fully identified and planned for from the outset of their care.
Care plans we reviewed did reflect people’s communication preferences and outlined any necessary adaptations. We observed that technology was being used to enhance communication and support engagement.
The provider used a secure electronic care planning system and with appropriate consent, family members could access electronic records through a dedicated family section, supporting transparency and involvement in care.
 

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. For example, the provider had an up-to-date complaints policy and procedure which they made available to people and family members. A record of complaints was maintained and showed complaints received were acknowledged and responded to in a timely way.
The provider held regular relatives’ meetings and facilitated a regular forum for people. which gave them an opportunity to raise concerns or make suggestions for change.
 

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider offered flexibility, enabling people to access support to attend appointments and participate in community activities.
The provider had appropriate arrangements in place to ensure access to support during emergency situations outside of regular hours. This provided reassurance that people’s needs could be met at any time.
Records showed that when individuals faced difficulties accessing appropriate dental services due to limited availability in the community, the manager took proactive steps to escalate these concerns and clearly documented the barriers encountered. This demonstrated the provider’s awareness of ongoing systemic challenges and their efforts to promote equitable access to all aspects of healthcare.
 

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Care plans demonstrated how the provider had considered people’s protected characteristics and made reasonable adjustments to support equity in their experience and outcomes. For example, one person with a physical disability required mobility aids, and the provider had ensured these were in place to support their independence and enhance their day-to-day experience.
Staff had completed training in equality, which supported their understanding of individual rights and the importance of promoting inclusive, person-centred care. This helped ensure people were treated fairly and with respect for their protected characteristics.
 

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.