You are here

Abbeyfield Residential Care Home - Castle Farm Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 24 September 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Abbeyfield Residential Care Home - Castle Farm is registered to provide accommodation for up to 24 people with residential care needs. 22 people were using the service at the time of the inspection. Some of the people were living with a dementia type illness.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People and family members told us the service was safe. Risks were well managed and lessons were learned to reduce future risks. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities about safeguarding. Arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure, and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service, and were continually assessed to ensure care plans remained relevant and any emerging needs were met. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. They helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff knew people well and understood what was important to them. People lived full and active lives and were protected from social isolation.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people were aware of how to make a complaint. An effective quality assurance process was in place. People, family members and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 25 March 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection carried out on 8 February 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 8 and 9 February 2017 and the first day was unannounced. This means the provider did not know we were coming.

Abbeyfield Residential Care Home- Castle Farm is a purpose built care home for older people, some of whom have a dementia-related condition. It does not provide nursing care. It has 24 bedrooms and 23 people were living there at the time of this inspection.

At the last inspection, the service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.

The service had a registered manager. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Systems were in place to protect people from avoidable harm. Staff received safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities for ensuring people’s safety. Risks to people, staff and visitors were assessed and monitored. The service took action to minimise risks where appropriate in order to keep people safe from harm.

Robust recruitment processes were in place to ensure staff members were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staffing levels were based on the dependency levels of people living at the home and were reviewed on a regular basis. Our observations during the inspection and from feedback we received were that staffing levels were appropriate to safely meet people’s needs.

Appropriate systems were in place for the management of people’s medicines. People were encouraged to maintain their independence, for example through retaining responsibility for managing their own medicines.

Staff were supported through the provision of role specific training, supervision sessions and annual appraisals. Although appraisals for some staff had lapsed at the time of the inspection, the registered manager had taken action to address this. Staff confirmed they felt well supported in their roles and spoke positively about the registered manager and their leadership and management of the home.

The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People’s capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment was assessed and where appropriate, “best interest” decisions were made on people’s behalf. These involved relevant healthcare professionals as well as people’s friends and family members.

People were very complimentary about the kind and caring nature of the staff team. The majority of staff had worked at the home for a significant period of time. They had developed strong, caring relationships with the people they supported and were very knowledgeable about the individual needs, likes and dislikes.

People’s needs were assessed prior to them joining the service. Detailed, person-centred care plans were produced which guided staff on how to care for people. These included details of any preferences people may have. People and their representatives were actively involved in their care planning and were also encouraged to voice their opinions about the service in general.

People’s needs were reviewed on an on-going basis and action taken to obtain the input of other healthcare professionals where appropriate. Systems were in place to ensure people had sufficient to eat and drink and to access other healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health.

A range of systems were in place to monitor and review the quality and effectiveness of the service. Action was taken to address areas for improvement identified. Complaints were taken seriously and records maintained of the action taken by the service in response to any form of dissatisfaction.

Inspection carried out on 30, 31 October and 6 November 2014

During a routine inspection

Abbeyfield Castle Farm provides accommodation for up to 24 older people who need or may need support with their personal care. The home is a purpose-built single storey building, with a large garden. All accommodation is in single bedrooms. There were 22 people living in the home at the time of our inspection.

This was an unannounced inspection, carried out over three days on 30, 31 October and 6 November 2014. The home was last inspected on 8 October 2013, when the provider met all the regulations inspected. A registered manager was in post. 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.

Good systems were in place to protect people living in the home from harm. All staff had been given regular training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Staff were clear about their responsibilities to be aware of and report any incidents of abuse or potential abuse immediately. People told us they felt very safe living in the home and believed staff would do everything necessary to keep them safe. No-one told us of any incidents of abuse or other issues of concern.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s needs in a safe and timely way. There was very little staff turnover, and the suitability of any new staff was carefully checked before they started working in the home.

People’s prescribed medicines were stored and administered safety, and clear records were kept of all medicines received, administered and disposed of.

People’s needs were carefully assessed before they came into the home, to ensure that all those needs could be met. People were fully involved in the assessment of their needs, and their wishes and preferences regarding the ways their care should be given were respected. Detailed plans were drawn up to meet each person’s individual needs and wishes, and these care plans were regularly evaluated to make sure they remained appropriate and effective. People told us they felt their care and welfare needs were consistently met, and that they received very good care.

People living in the home were offered a varied and nutritious diet, with plenty of choice. Special dietary needs were met. People told us they were very happy with quality and quantity of their meals.

People had access to the full range of community and specialist healthcare services, and had their health closely monitored by the staff. People told us the staff were alert to, and responded to, any changes in their health or demeanour. We spoke with health professionals who supported the home. They told us the home made appropriate and prompt referrals and always carried out any advice they were given regarding the person’s care and treatment.

The atmosphere in the home was relaxed and positive, and we saw that staff were caring and sensitive in their approach and actions. People told us they were very well cared for, and spoke highly of the kindness and attention of the manager and staff in the home.

People and their families were encouraged to express their views and be actively involved in their own care and in the running of the home. There were frequent residents’ meetings and the manager made time to speak with people regularly. Good information was displayed about the services and activities on offer. Important contact details, such as advocacy services, were made available to people and their visitors, to help them maintain their independence.

People told us they were treated with respect by staff, and said that their privacy and dignity were protected by all the staff. They told us they and their families were fully involved in deciding their care needs and how those needs were to be met by the staff. Regular reviews allowed people to comment on their care and ask for changes to their care plans. People told us they received their care in the ways they wanted, and that staff were flexible and responded well to any requests.

We were told the manager and staff took very seriously any concerns raised by people living in the home, and addressed such issues speedily. People told us they rarely had to formally complain about the service. Only one formal complaint had been raised in the previous 12 months, and this had been resolved quickly.

The service had a wide range of activities and opportunities for social stimulation, both in the home and in the local community. People told us they were happy with the social activities available to them, and said that staff made every attempt to meet individual preferences, as well as providing group activities.

The registered manager provided clear leadership and ensured there was an open and positive culture in the home. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and were proud of the quality of care they provided and were happy working in the home. They said they felt supported and respected by the management team.

People living in the home spoke very highly of the manager and said she was always approachable, positive and responsive. They said they felt listened to by the manager and her staff, and were encouraged to express themselves freely. We were told the home had a happy and relaxed atmosphere and our observations confirmed this.

Health professionals who supported the home commented very positively on the quality of the management of the home. They told us the manager was very professional in her approach and ran a very good home.

Inspection carried out on 8 October 2013

During a routine inspection

People were treated with respect by staff at all times, and they were asked to give their consent to their care and treatment.

People's care and personal needs were carefully assessed before any care was given. Detailed personalised care plans were in place to guide staff on how best to meet people's needs and their personal preferences. People told us they were very happy with their care. One person told us, �I�m very happy, here, and very settled. They do everything for me.� Another person said, �The staff care for me in the way I want to be cared for. They are very friendly, and take a great interest in you and your family.� A third person told us, �I am well looked after. I can�t think how the home could be improved.�

Where people were able and willing to take responsibility for their prescribed medicines, they were able to do so. For other people, appropriate arrangements were in place for the ordering, storage and administration of their medicines.

The home took care to make sure that only properly vetted and suitable people were employed to work in the home.

The home listened to what people said and acted accordingly. Very few complaints were received.

Inspection carried out on 21 August 2012

During a routine inspection

People living in the home were uniformly positive in their views about the home. Comments included:

�Very good care � really caring�

�I would recommend it to anyone�

�Best place in the north of England!�

We spoke with visitors to the home, who were also very positive. Their comments included:

�Lovely home, absolutely fabulous. It rates well in all areas�

�A very good home. I�ve been in many homes over the years and this is one of the best�

�Very caring place�.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)