• Care Home
  • Care home

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

Heron Drive, Bishops Hull, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 5HA (01823) 334238

Provided and run by:
Abbeyfield Somerset Society Limited

All Inspections

26 July 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

About the service

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society is a residential care home. The home is registered to provide personal care and accommodation to up to 44 people. The home specialises in the care of older people, including people living with dementia.

The building is split into three main areas. The main part of the home has 19 en-suite rooms and 8 self-contained apartments. There is also a 13 bedded area, called Quantock, which provides care to people who are living with dementia.

At the time of the inspection 38 people were living at the home.

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

People lived in a home where the provider and registered manager were passionate about providing high quality person-centred care. The ethos of respecting people’s views and wishes was embedded into the culture of the home.

Staff were inventive in seeking people’s views. This included holding a fashion show for people to choose staff uniforms. They also held a competition to name the newly opened bar.

There was a dedicated activities team who oversaw an outstanding activity programme. People had opportunities to continue their hobbies and interests and were supported to do so.

People and their relatives were very complimentary about how activities had been adapted during the pandemic to minimise the risks of loneliness and isolation.

The activity programme was based on people’s interests and was inclusive and empowering. People were able to continue to use their skills and were valued members of their community.

The provider and registered manager continually strived to make improvements in accordance with people’s wishes and needs. They worked with other professionals and used evidence-based practice to ensure they kept up to date with legislation and best practice.

There were excellent systems to monitor the quality of care including the use of outside consultants. When these systems identified shortfalls, robust action had been taken to ensure ongoing improvements. Lessons learnt were shared with staff and people to make sure everyone was involved.

People benefitted from a registered manager who encouraged and welcomed positive and negative feedback. Their motto was ‘Feedback is a gift.’ People felt able to discuss any issues with staff and the management. This all helped to promote an open and learning culture.

People’s relatives praised the management of the home and culture they had promoted. People appreciated the openness and transparency of the management.

The staff were very responsive to people’s needs and preferences providing different care for people’s different needs and wishes. This was demonstrated in the varied décor styles and atmospheres of different areas of the home.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and experience to meet their needs. Bespoke staff training was provided to make sure staff could effectively support people with specialist needs, such as people who were living with dementia.

People were happy and relaxed at the home and with staff who supported them. People felt included and said they felt ‘at home.’

People could be assured that at the end of their life they and their families and friends would receive high quality kind and compassionate care. Staff worked with other professionals to enhance their skills in this area and promote comfort and dignity for people.

People felt able to continue to follow their own routines and make choices about all aspects of their day to day lives.

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

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 the service was good (published 1 November 2019.)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service and the length of time since the last rating.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

This was a focused inspection looking at the key questions of effective, responsive and well led only.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

The overall rating for the service has changed from good to outstanding based on the findings of this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

24 March 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society is a care home which is registered to provide care and accommodation to up to 44 people. The home is able to provide care for older people with a variety of needs.

One part of the home, Quantock, provides care for people living with dementia, the main part of the home provides care to older people with personal care needs and there are apartments for people who wish to live a more independent lifestyle within the safety and security of the care home. At the time of the inspection 31 people were living at the home.

We found the following examples of good practice.

Staff were following good infection prevention and control measures to minimise risks to people. There were regular audits and competency checks to make sure good practice was fully understood and followed by staff.

There were various ways for people to see and keep in touch with friends and family. The home had a variety of safe visiting areas and staff were supporting people with video and phone calls.

Where there were specific concerns about a person the registered manager had arranged for a family member to be an essential carer to enable them to visit more regularly. This had proved very beneficial to the person. The essential carer told us they had completed training in infection prevention and control and wearing personal protective equipment. They were also part of the home’s testing regime.

People continued to have access to a variety of activities and entertainment. This included daily activities, celebrating special events and drives out in the home’s minibus.

Staff felt very well supported by the management team and told us they felt safe working at the home. Staff we spoke with praised the registered manager for how well they kept people, families and staff up to date with what was happening in the home and any changes that had needed to be made.

9 October 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society is a care home which is registered to provide care and accommodation to up to 44 people. The home is able to provide care for older people with a variety of needs.

One part of the home, Quantock, provides care for people living with dementia, the main part of the home provides care to older people with personal care needs and there are six apartments for people who wish to live a more independent lifestyle within the safety and security of the care home. At the time of the inspection 41 people were living at the home.

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

People lived in a home which was extremely responsive to their needs and wishes. Staff respected people’s individuality, their values and beliefs and provided care and support in a way that reflected these. People were able to follow their own routines and staff respected these.

There was an emphasis on ensuring people continued to live a full a life as possible. There were ample opportunities for people to continue to pursue their own interests and hobbies and take part in a wide range of social activities and events. When people suggested activities they would like to take part in, staff went out of their way to make things happen for people.

People were able to take part in activities in the local area to make sure they continued to be valued members of their community. People were encouraged to keep in touch with friends and family. Visitors, including religious representatives, were always made welcome at the home. The staff were innovative and used their community links to help people to understand technology to maintain social relationships and for care planning.

People felt safe at the home and with the staff who supported them. The provider had systems which ensured there were adequate numbers of staff to keep people safe and to meet their varied needs. Staff were well trained to meet people’s individual needs.

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

People received their care and support from staff who were kind and caring. Staff knew people well and people had formed trusting and affectionate relationships with staff and other people at the home. People or their representatives were fully involved in planning their care and in the running of the home.

The home was well led by the provider, a registered manager and experienced management team. People could be confident with the systems in place to monitor standards of care, respond to concerns and plan on-going improvements.

Staff were well supported and highly motivated. This led to a happy and inclusive environment for people to live in.

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 April 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.

28 February 2017

During a routine inspection

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society is a care home which is registered to provide care and accommodation to up to 44 people. The home is able to provide care for older people with a variety of needs. One part of the home, Quantock, provides care for people living with dementia, the main part of the home provides care to older people with personal care needs and there are six apartments for people who wish to live a more independent lifestyle within the safety and security of the care home.

At the time of the inspection there were 34 people living at the home

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

People remained safe at the home. There were adequate numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs and to spend time socialising with them. One person said “There’s enough of them [staff] to keep us all entertained and amused.” Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely.

Improvements had been made to ensure people received receive effective care. 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 had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. People told us their healthcare needs were met and staff supported them to attend appointments.

The home continued to provide a caring service to people. People told us, and we observed, that staff were kind and patient. One person commented “They [staff] are unfailingly kind and courteous.” People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care and support was personalised to each person which ensured they were able to make choices about their day to day lives. There was an excellent programme of activities which made sure people could continue with their hobbies and interests. Complaints were fully investigated and responded to.

The service continued to be well led. People told us the management within the home were open and approachable. The registered manager and provider continually monitored the quality of the service and made improvements in accordance with people’s changing needs. People lived in a happy environment because staff morale was good.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

16 September 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 16 September 2015.

The last inspection of the home was carried out in February 2014. No concerns were identified with the care being provided to people at that inspection.

Abbeyfield (Somerset) Society provides personal care and accommodation for up to 44 people. The home specialises in the care of older people including people living with dementia. The building is divided into three main areas. There is an apartment wing which has six self-contained apartments. A residential area provides care to up to 20 older people who have a variety of needs and a separate area provides specialist care and support to people living with dementia.

There is a registered manager 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.

The registered manager had appropriate qualifications and experience to manage the home. They were supported by a management team which ensured senior staff were always available to people.

Care and support was personalised to each person and people were able to make choices about their day to day lives. However staff did not demonstrate a clear understanding of how to support people to make decisions when they did not have the mental capacity to make a decision for themselves. This could potentially place people at risk of not having their legal rights protected.

People had opportunities to take part in a wide range of activities and there was ongoing social stimulation for people. The provider ensured people had access to innovative social activities at the home and in the wider community. They worked in partnership with other organisations to achieve this.

People felt safe at the home and with the staff who supported them. One person said “I’m safe as houses here.” Another person told us “I’m getting good care and I feel safe.”

People lived in a comfortable environment which was maintained and furnished to a high standard. Signage and other aids were in place to support people to maintain their independence.

People’s health needs were monitored and they had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs. Incidents and accidents were analysed to ensure people received the support they required to maintain their health and well-being.

People had their nutritional needs assessed and received meals in accordance with their needs. People were complimentary about the food served in the home.

People were supported in a manner that respected their privacy and dignity. People told us staff were kind and friendly. Everyone felt well cared for. One person told us “Nothing is ever too much trouble. They seem very happy to help you.” Another person said “You couldn’t have better care,”

People who were able, were involved in decisions about their care, including the care they would like at the end of their life. There were meetings for people and staff to enable them to have a say in the running of the home. There was also a monthly newsletter to keep them informed of any changes.

We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

4 February 2014

During a routine inspection

The home was divided into three units, one unit provided specialist care for people with dementia. We were unable to speak with people in this unit due to limited verbal communication, we were able to speak to people in the other units and gathered evidence from speaking with staff, and observing care.

People we spoke to were happy with the service provided. One person told us "It couldn't be better". Another person told us "I am very happy here, the staff are friendly and there is a nice atmosphere".

We saw evidence that staff training was comprehensive and up to date. The staff we spoke to demonstrated that they were familiar with systems in place to recognise and report abuse and felt confident to do so.

All the staff we spoke to were happy in their work, one member of staff told us "When I wake up, I want to go to work". The enthusiasm of the staff was reflected in their commitment to provide a stimulating environment for people with numerous activities and social events.

Meals provided at the home were of a high standard, offering a wide variety which were appetising and nutritionally balanced. People told us "The food is smashing and there is always plenty to eat".

The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the service of provision. These systems allowed for continuous improvement of the service through regular audit and gathering views from residents, relatives and staff.

7 December 2012

During a routine inspection

The home was divided into three areas. One area provided specialist care to people who had a dementia. In this part of the home some people were unable to fully express their views but we saw that they had unrestricted access to their rooms and all communal areas. We also noted that staff offered people choices about food, drinks and activities.

We observed that people were able to choose how and where they spent their time. We noted that some people spent time in communal areas and some preferred to occupy themselves in their personal rooms. We saw that staff knocked on bedroom doors before entering which showed that they respected people's privacy.

People said that they had been involved in writing their care plan. We were told 'they ask you how you would like things done and they write it all down so everyone knows.'

Everyone we asked said that they were happy with the care that they received. Comments included 'the care is good,' 'I am well looked after' and 'I couldn't wish for better care.'

All areas of the home that we saw were clean and fresh.

We looked at the recruitment files of the three most recently appointed members of staff. These files demonstrated that the home had a robust recruitment procedure which minimised the risks of abuse to people who lived at the home.

People who were able to express an opinion said that they would be able to speak with a member of staff if they were unhappy about the service they received.

28 October 2011

During a routine inspection

The home was divided into three areas. The main area provided single room accommodation and another part was made up of six self contained apartments. The third area of the home provided specialist care for people who had a dementia. Many people living in this part of the home were unable to fully express their views verbally. We observed that people appeared content and relaxed with the staff who supported them.

We saw that people were able to make choices about where they spent their time. Some people spent time in the communal areas, some in their personal rooms and some attended activities in the activities area.

People told us that they were able to make choices about what time they got up, when they went to bed and how they spent their day. One person said 'We please ourselves really.'

Some people spoken with were aware of their care plans and said that they were always asked about the care they needed. One person told us 'They always ask you how you want to be helped.'

Everyone said that their privacy was respected and felt that they were treated with dignity. One person commented 'Staff always knock on your door and are always very polite.' Throughout the day we observed that staff spoke in a friendly polite manner.

The menu showed that there is always a choice of main meal and people living in the main part of the home said that they were asked what they would like before each meal. On the day of our visit we observed that people living in the area of the home which cares for people with a dementia were not offered a choice of main meal, condiments or which vegetables they preferred.

People told us that they were very happy with the care that they received. Comments included 'It's wonderful the way we are looked after,' 'They look after you very well' and 'I get all the help I need.'

Everyone asked said that they always got the care that they needed. One person said 'If you are not well they look after you' another person said 'If you are ever in pain they will sort it out very quickly.'

People said that they would be happy to speak with a member of staff if they were unhappy about any aspect of their care. One person said 'Anything you are not happy about you just say.'

People living at the home felt there was sufficient staff to meet their needs. One person said 'There are plenty of staff and they are always quick to help.' Another person commented 'Staff will do anything for you, you only have to ask.'

We observed that staff responded promptly to any requests for assistance. There was a relaxed atmosphere in the home and staff had time to socialise with people as well as undertake tasks.

All staff appeared confident and well motivated. One person said 'Staff have been very well appointed and trained. They are very kind and responsible but still have a sense of humour.'