You are here

Archived: Abbeywood Outstanding

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 3 July 2013
Date of Publication: 26 July 2013
Inspection Report published 26 July 2013 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 3 July 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others.

We noted from the record of provider monthly monitoring visits a number of quality audits had been undertaken. For example; health and safety, infection control, medicines, care plans, staff handover notes, safeguarding referrals, complaints and staff training audits. The registered manager told us the provider’s representative also spoke with people and staff during their visits to gain their views on the service. People who could express a view could not recall having discussions with the provider's representatives during these visits. However staff spoken with told us people were spoken with during the provider visits.

The registered manger told us quality monitoring at the home was continuous and that many of the staff were involved in undertaking the audits. We saw records regarding medicine audits, cleaning audits, health and safety audits for example. Staff spoken with told us they were involved in the quality monitoring, one said “It’s a good thing we are involved as it allows us to identify any shortfalls there may be and gives us the authority to deal with these straight away.”

The registered manager informed us there had been a quality survey in March 2013 whereby people and their relatives had been asked their views on the quality of the service provided. We looked at several of the responses from this survey. We noted they expressed a high level of satisfaction with care provided at the home. For example, ‘I wish to compliment the staff’, and ‘All staff are calm and very caring.’ ‘The care given is first class. ’We also sampled a number of “thank you” cards which indicated a high level of satisfaction with the care. For example ’Can’t put into words how grateful I am for all the care and support.’ And ‘The family of X would like to thank you all for the excellent care. Her final years were happy thanks to the care and friendship you gave her.’

The registered manager also discussed the meetings held with people and their families to discuss the running of the home. We looked at the minutes of the last meeting held in June 2013. These minutes showed us a number of areas had been discussed with people. For example, food and meal times, general issues around care, hairdressing, laundry, the shop and activities. One person who could express a view said "The meetings give me an opportunity to discuss any issues I may have. And gives me space to give staff some ideas.” One relative spoken with told us “My ideas are always well received.” This meant that people and their relatives were given the opportunity to voice their opinions as to the quality of the service at the home and have their views listened to.

We also noted that a number of staff meetings had been held since our previous inspection. For example head of department, general staff meetings, and housekeeping meetings. We saw the most recent general staff meeting had been held on 23 June 2013. We spoke with staff about these meetings. They told us the meetings provided a good forum for expressing their views. This meant staff had been given the opportunity to give their views on the quality of the service and have their views listened to.