This inspection took place on 2 October 2015 and was unannounced.
The last inspection took place on 4 July 2013, the service was meeting all of regulations we looked at.
Abbey Lea Care Home provides residential care for up to 23 older people living with dementia. The building is an old farmhouse with an extension. People had ensuite rooms and there was plenty of communal space. Two rooms were shared rooms. The service had patio doors onto an enclosed courtyard with a variety of well-kept plants for people to enjoy.
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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Staff knew how to protect people from avoidable harm. Staff had attended safeguarding training and the service had an up to date safeguarding policy which provided staff with clear instruction about the action they would need to take. The service had a whistleblowing policy which meant staff knew how to raise any concerns and who to contact. Staff told us they were confident the registered manager would deal with any concerns appropriately and quickly.
People had risk assessments and risk management plans which staff followed to keep people safe. These were well developed and people, their families and the relevant health and social care professionals had been consulted. They provided staff with step by step guidance about how to keep people safe. They balanced the need to keep safe with the right to freedom which meant people were not unnecessarily restricted.
The service had sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People who used the service, their relatives and staff members confirmed this.
Medicines were managed safely. Staff had received the appropriate training and we saw staff offered people explanation and reassurance when their medication was being administered. People who needed medication to be administered as required, due to agitation or distress, had detailed plans staff should follow and medication was administered as a last resort.
The service had emergency evacuation plans and the fire alarm was tested in line with the fire safety policy.
Staff were supported and trained to help them deliver effective care. They had access to mandatory training, and staff told us they were supported to attend other courses which would be of benefit to their personal development and people who used the service.
The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were consistently followed by staff. Consent to care and treatment was sought. When people were unable to make informed decisions we saw a record of best interest decisions. There was a record of the person’s views and other relevant people in their life. The registered manager had a clear understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
People told us the food was good. We saw people had access to regular drinks, snacks and a varied and nutritional diet. If people were at risk of losing weight we saw plans were in place to manage this and the appropriate healthcare professionals had been consulted.
Staff were kind, caring and spoke with warmth and compassion about the people they supported. People’s dignity and privacy was respected. Life stories had been completed with people and their families and these enabled staff to get a real sense of the person and what was important to them.
A visiting health professional told us staff were caring and knew people well. People and their families confirmed this.
Staff we spoke with told us they would be happy for their relative to live at the service, if they needed this kind of care.
Care was planned and delivered in a person centred way. People and their families were involved and we saw regular reviews took place. Care plans provided staff with information about how the person wanted to be supported.
People and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint but had never needed to. The service had received a variety of compliments. Feedback was sought from people as part of the review of their care.
People had access to a range of activities. They were supported to maintain their relationships with families. People had their religious needs met.
The service was well-led. Everyone we spoke with was full of praise for the registered manager. Staff morale was high and there was a strong sense of staff being committed to providing person centred care.
The registered manager was committed to ongoing professional development and spoke passionately about the service. They had a strong understanding of the importance of supporting the person and their family to live well.