You are here

Abbeyfield Grove House - DCA Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 4 August 2018

This inspection took place on 5, 6 and 10 July 2018 and was announced.

Abbeyfield Grove House Domiciliary Care Agency provides personal care to people living in their own apartments within the Abbeyfield Independent Living with Extra Care complex. The agency is part of an integrated care scheme providing supported living for people aged 55 and above and operates a 24-hour service. Not everyone using the agency receives regulated activity. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

On the first day of our inspection, the service was supporting 24 people to live in their own apartments within the complex although one person had moved to a residential care setting on the final day of our inspection.

There was 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.

At our last inspection in April 2017, we found shortfalls in the safe management of medicines and the service was in breach of Regulations. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question of ‘is the service safe?’ to at least good. At this inspection, we saw improvements had been made which meant the service was no longer in breach of Regulations.

Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff to ensure all care visits were made, with staff staying the required length of time and completing required tasks. Staff received appropriate training and they told us the training was good and relevant to their role. Staff were supported by the registered manager and received formal supervision where they could discuss their ongoing development needs.

People who used the service and their relatives told us staff were helpful, attentive and caring. We saw people were treated with respect and compassion.

Care plans were up to date and detailed what care and support people wanted and needed at each care visit. Risk assessments were in place and showed what action had been taken to mitigate any risks which had been identified. People felt safe and appropriate referrals were made to the safeguarding team when necessary.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People’s healthcare needs were being met and medicines were stored and managed safely.

Staff knew about people’s dietary needs and preferences. People were encouraged to consume a healthy diet and were provided with plenty of drinks and snacks in between meals.

Activities were on offer to keep people occupied both within the community hub, shared with the provider’s adjoining residential service, and the wider community.

The complaints procedure was displayed. Records showed complaints received had been dealt with appropriately although more information was needed to evidence outcomes.

Everyone spoke highly of the registered manager and said they were approachable and supportive. The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care provided and where issues were identified they acted to make improvements.

We found all the fundamental standards were being met. Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas



Updated 4 August 2018

The service was safe.

Staff were recruited safely. Sufficient staff were employed to provide people with the care and support they needed.

Staff understood how to keep people safe and where risks had been identified, action had been taken to mitigate those risks.

Medicines were managed safely and kept under review.



Updated 4 August 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were trained and supported to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to meet people�s needs.

People were supported to access health care services to meet their individual needs.

The legal requirements relating to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being met.



Updated 4 August 2018

The service was caring.

People using the service told us they liked the staff and found them attentive and kind.

We saw staff treated people with kindness and patience and knew people well.

People�s privacy and dignity was respected and maintained.



Updated 4 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People�s care records reflected the support required at each visit, were up to date and regularly reviewed.

People were encouraged to access meaningful activities within the Abbeyfield complex and the wider community.

A complaints procedure was in place and people told us they felt able to raise any concerns.



Updated 4 August 2018

The service was well-led.

A registered manager was in place who provided effective leadership and management of the home.

Effective quality assurance systems were in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service.