Abbey House

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

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider mostly made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Admission assessments were used to understand people’s needs before they came to the service, and a range of assessment tools were used for continuous review of people’s needs. However, some risk assessments did not always consider all potentially influencing medical conditions. This meant that not all assessment processes were thoroughly completed.

Where appropriate, relatives, advocates, and health and social care professionals were meaningfully involved in the assessment of people’s needs and clinical care reviews. One relative told us, “The home keeps us informed.” Another relative told us, “"The whole family is happy with the care.” Clear care records were completed to support reviews and evidence appropriate action taken in response to changes.

People were supported by staff who were well trained and received information and supervision to ensure they were working in line with best practice guidance and standards. Kitchen and care staff understood people’s nutrition and hydration needs, and information was readily available in people’s care plans and within the kitchen. Where needed, people were referred for clinical reviews. For example, we raised an observation about a person’s eating and the registered manager immediately submitted a referral to speak and language therapy for further investigation. One relative told us, “They [staff] phone if there is a problem or the GP has been.”

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. Regular handovers and team meetings took place to ensure effective communication and handover of information. One staff member told us, “At the start of every shift there’s always a clear and detailed handover.” Care staff positively engaged with health and social care professionals to ensure the wellbeing of people living at the service. Tasks and responsibilities were delegated and teams worked together effectively. One relative told us, “There seems to be a schedule of care whereby carers are given specific people to look after during the day. I have noticed that the carers are proactive and ask people if they need assistance such as going to the bathroom.”

The provider mostly supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Care staff proactively encouraged people to remain active and to engage with others. One person told us they had made friends at the service and felt welcome. One relative told us, “Staff encouraged [relative] to go downstairs to have a cup of tea on her first day which got [relative] to take the first step out of her room. Now [relative] goes to the dining room and joins in activities.” Care staff monitored people’s wellbeing and took action if people became unwell, or their care needs changed. Care staff were considerate and mindful about ensuring people’s quality of life. For example, one staff member told us, “It’s really important that people get a good night’s sleep. Repositioning and giving continence care at night can wake some people up, so we try and do it as sensitively and as quickly as possible.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People were repositioned as needed to prevent development of pressure related injuries and records were well maintained to ensure effective monitoring. Where needed, people’s food and fluids were monitored to minimise risk of weight loss and dehydration. One staff member told us, “If it's not written down it didn't happen, you have to document everything.” Assistive technology was used to monitor people’s wellbeing. One staff member told us, “Falls always take priority, if a sensor mat is activated, it always takes priority. We all know we have to attend to that before anything else.” The provider’s systems and processes supported effective monitoring of people’s care.

The provider mostly told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Most people felt they had choice and control over their care and movements. However, some people did express to us that they felt they weren’t freely allowed to leave the service, or didn’t feel informed about the status of their care placement. We raised this with the provider, and they spoke with these people to ensure they were aware of their rights and involved with decisions about their care.

When people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, the provider met with relatives and consulted health and social care professionals 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.