Abbington House

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

This means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high- quality, person centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. This is the first inspection for this newly registered service.

This key question has been rated as requires improvement because multi-disciplinary meetings had only just been implemented and were still being embedded. This means that processes for information sharing were not yet in place. Multi-disciplinary meetings did not include safeguarding as an agenda item. Governance meetings had recently been implemented, meaning that the provider was not consistently monitoring the quality and safety of the service.

There were training gaps across the staff team. Not all staff had completed mandatory training, which included training in safeguarding adults and children and basic life support.

However, there was a risk register in place where ongoing risk were monitored. The service also had a business continuity plan in place to mitigate for events that might prevent the service from running. Managers had also made changes to their medication administration recording process, due to error with their electronic recording system. Managers had identified gaps within the service, such as meetings not taking place and actions had been taken to address this.

This service scored 57 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Managers told us the vision of Abbington House was to help and support individuals, families and communities across the United Kingdom to transform their lives and achieve freedom from addiction.

Leaders had not all completed mandatory training or leadership courses. However, the provider told us that they were looking into management courses for healthcare. Most leaders had experience of working in substance use. Overall, 60% of staff had completed diversity, equality and inclusion training. Staff told us that leaders were present onsite and that they engaged with clients.

Staff told us the team supported each other. Many members of the team had known each other prior to working at Abbington House. Staff told us that managers were visible within the service and that they were available for support. The service valued lived experience and staff showed compassion for clients.

Leaders told us they had a whistleblowing procedure that staff were aware of. Some staff members we spoke with were not aware of the policy but said they would raise concerns directly with a manager. The service did not have a whistleblowing champion in place since the previous registered manager had left their post.

However, clients had opportunities to give feedback in community meetings. They were also asked to provide feedback on discharge from the service. Feedback from clients was positive about their care and treatment.

The service had an equality policy in place. Some staff members at Abbington House have lived experience of substance use and were representative of the client population.

The systems and processes in the service did not always keep people safe. The frequency of governance meetings did not ensure the provider could assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services provided in a timely manner.

There were issues that we identified during the inspection where it was not clear how these concerns were escalated or what governance systems were in place to identify these issues. For example, the service had two multi- disciplinary meetings between December 2024 and January 2025. There was no clear agenda of what must be discussed at team meetings to ensure that essential information was shared. Governance meetings had recently been implemented. There was evidence of two governance meetings taking place and there was a clear agenda which included safeguarding, incidents, training, health and safety and complaints. It was not clear how concerns were escalated and actioned.

We reviewed staff files and found that a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check was not always in place when new members of staff began their employment. One staff member had been without a DBS check for 6 months. We found one staff file was missing a risk assessment upon appointment, after disclosing previous convictions. Since our inspection the risk assessment has been completed. Some staff files only had one reference in place. References had not always been received when staff had begun their employment.

Environmental risks were not always managed. The services' fire policy had not yet been approved. The policy was in draft, meaning that fire procedure was not clear to staff. However, there was a fire risk assessment in place.

There was a risk register in place, where ongoing risks were monitored, the impact was assessed, and mitigation was documented.

The service had business continuity plans in place for events that might impact the day to day running of Abbington House. This included events, such as impact on staffing through illness. The plan detailed actions and responsibilities of staff and managers.

Staff had experienced issues with the medication recording system and were using paper medication administration record (MAR) charts in their place. Managers had developed a medication administration support guide for staff to aid with the change in process to paper MAR charts.

Managers had begun working alongside key organisations to support care provision and support service development. The service had good relationships with a local substance misuse service who trained some staff members to use naloxone. The service also had good relationships with a signposting and referral service. Partners told us that their experience of working alongside Abbington House had been positive. Partners told us that clients were made to feel safe, and staff were compassionate.

Managers had an action plan in place, which identified issues or gaps within the service and what actions had been taken to address them. This included gaps such as staff meetings not taking place. We saw evidence of monthly staff meetings being implemented, which enable the service to share information with the staff team.

The service manager had developed a newsletter to keep staff informed and to support with sharing information with the team.