Abbotsleigh Mews Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s needs, risks and choices were assessed and planned for. People and their relatives told us they were involved in assessing and planning for their care and staff discussed this with them. One person told us, “They [staff] ask me all the time. We discussed what I needed help with and how I like things to be done.” A second person commented, “They [staff] are amazing, I have never asked a question that they haven’t been able to answer.”

Assessments were used to create care plans which outlined people’s care and support needs, and tasks staff were required to complete. Care plans were regularly reviewed to reflect any changes in individuals needs and wishes. However, care plans and records were not always sufficiently specific or individualised to address particular needs. For example, some assessments lacked detailed considerations for different types of diabetes management, dementia and mental health needs and some gaps were noted in the recordings of people’s repositioning records. We drew these to the home manager and regional directors’ attention. Following our assessment of the service we saw an action plan was in place to address these areas.

Care plans and assessments included information about people's histories, communication needs and how they wanted to be supported.

Staff were appropriately trained and delivered evidence-based care. People and their relatives told us they felt staff were very well trained and knowledgeable. Comments included, “They [staff] seem to know exactly what they are doing”, “They’re [staff] wonderful, they know me so well that they get me something before I knew I needed it”, “They [staff] are a first class team, and always seem to know what they are doing”, and “They [staff] are knowledgeable and skilled.”

Staff received up to date training and had a range of information available about best practice. Staff attended regular and daily meetings held which provided them with updates from the management team to further understand and embed best practice.

People's nutrition, hydration, preferences, and cultural needs were met. People and their relatives told us they enjoyed the food and menus on offer. Comments included, “I feel like I’m in a restaurant when I eat here, it’s lovely”, “The food is so good now, such an improvement. The chef really knows the residents”, and “I think the chef here is amazing.”

The chef and kitchen staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary and cultural needs and daily menus offered choice. The chef told us a daily huddle staff meeting was held every morning with managers. He said he received feedback and updates about meals, people’s changing needs and risks, and any new clinical recommendations made for people.

We observed how people were supported at lunch time within communal dining areas and when eating in their rooms. The atmosphere in dining areas was relaxed and staff were attentive to people’s needs. Where people required support from staff to eat their meals safely, we observed that support was provided appropriately and with dignity. People were offered choice from sample plates. People were provided with diverse meal options that catered to their specific dietary needs, such as diced, pureed, suitable for diabetics, low in fat and salt options. We observed that staff followed guidance from health care professionals such as dieticians when supporting people at mealtimes.

There were systems in place to ensure and support better staff communication. Regular meetings were held including a daily staff huddle where information was shared across the staffing team. One member of staff told us, “I feel really supported here. Management's door is always open, and they actually listen when you have a problem. It makes a huge difference.” Another staff member commented, “We have regular team meetings where we can share ideas and raise concerns. It's good to know everyone's on the same page.”

We saw staff communicated effectively with other professionals. These included the local authority, regular GP visits to liaise with nursing staff, tissue viability nurses, community mental health teams, palliative care teams and dietitians amongst others.

People were supported with their health needs. People told us they had access to health care professional when required. Comments included, “The Doctor sees me every week”, “Chiropodist, Doctor, anyone we need, it’s all arranged for us”, “The staff organise anything you want or need”, and “Anything we need we just ask, and it happens.”

People’s health needs were assessed and care plans documented how best people should be supported. Staff monitored people’s conditions and took action if people became unwell. We saw staff made timely referrals when people required medical healthcare and treatment and when staff needed advice and information for changes in people’s conditions.

Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing. Monitoring tools and records were kept for the monitoring of food and fluid intake, medical conditions, weight and skin conditions amongst others. Staff were alerted by the providers electronic care plan system when there were changes or a decrease in people’s care needs to ensure staff took appropriate actions to address them. Staff recorded care interventions, and the management team monitored records to ensure care was provided appropriately and safely.

However, some care plans and records were not always sufficiently specific or individualised to address particular needs. For example, some assessments lacked detailed considerations for different types of diabetes management and some gaps were noted in the recordings of people’s repositioning records. We drew these to the home manager and regional directors’ attention. Following our assessment of the service we saw an action plan was in place to address these areas.

People were asked to consent to their care and treatment. People told us staff were respectful and always sought their consent. Comments included, “They [staff] always check before they do anything”, “They [staff] always ask even though [loved one] may or may not respond”, “They [staff] always remember to speak clearly and check that I understand.”

When people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, the provider met with relatives where appropriate to ensure any decisions made, were in the person’s best interests. Staff promoted people's rights and worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. The provider had requested legal authorisations where restrictions were in place. Decisions around these were made in people’s best interests and for their safety.