Abafields Residential 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People and relatives did not report any concerns about discrimination and were supported with the development of positive relationships with peers. Staff received equality and diversity training and there was an equality and diversity policy in place to provide guidance.

People were provided the opportunity to share what was important to them if they chose to. The accommodation did not have any barriers to access; however, several rooms were shared rooms. The manager told us people could choose to have the shared room as a single room if they preferred. A relative told us, “When [person] came in here, we paid for a single room but 2 months ago they moved [them] into a room with someone else but didn't tell me. The staff are ok; I have never had a disagreement with them other than recently regarding the shared room.” We saw enough staff were on duty and observed their relationships with people were positive and they knew people well. A staff member said, “Most of the time staffing is okay, although there is sickness. We are able to meet people’s care needs, and I have been told there will be more staff for the additional bedrooms.”

Surveys and meetings were used to measure people’s experiences of the care provided. Staff liaised with relatives to ensure people received good quality care. A relative told us, “My son and I were initially involved in [person’s] care plan when [they] came in but nothing since, until this week with the social worker.”

A plan was in place for a new schedule of meetings, beginning in the second week of August, to introduce the new management team, to provide people and their relatives with information of upcoming improvement plans and goals, and to ask for feedback. 1-1 meetings could be held with people and their relatives to ensure care plans were person centred.

The manager ensured staff were trained in equality and diversity. Staff had access to service specific training, which also included an understanding of the people they were supporting beliefs, wishes and cultural backgrounds, for example providing Halal meat for a person’s religious requirements. The manager was also committed to ensuring staff cultures and religious beliefs were recognised.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.