You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

Abbeyfield Grange is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care home accommodates up to 26 people living with mental health conditions. The service comprises of two houses, numbers 143 and 148 Burngreave Road. Number 148 accommodates up to 19 people. Number 143, which is across the road, accommodates up to seven people who are more independent. The ethos of the home is to promote independence and well-being. The home is in the residential area of Burngreave and near a GP surgery, a hospital and other amenities.

Abbeyfield Grange has been operating for a number of years. A change of the named provider resulted in a new registration. The registered manager is also the registered provider of this service. This is the first inspection of the service since these changes.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This inspection took place on 30 November 2017 and was unannounced. This meant the people who lived at Abbeyfield Grange and the staff who worked there did not know we were coming. On the day of our inspection there were 26 people living at Abbeyfield Grange.

People spoke positively about their experience of living at Abbeyfield Grange. They told us they felt safe and they liked the staff. We were unable to fully communicate with some people living at Abbeyfield Grange, but we saw that people were content and happy to spend time with staff.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures and knew what to do if an allegation was made or they suspected abuse.

We found systems were in place to make sure medicines were stored and managed safely so people’s health was looked after.

Staff recruitment procedures were robust and ensured people’s safety was promoted.

Sufficient numbers of staff were provided to meet people’s needs.

Staff were provided with relevant training and supervision so they had the skills they needed to undertake their role. Systems were in place to make sure staff had an annual appraisal for their development.

The home was well maintained and was clean in the areas we saw.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The registered provider’s policies and systems supported this practice.

People had access to a range of health care professionals to help maintain their health. A varied diet was provided, which took into account dietary needs and preferences so people’s health was promoted and choices could be respected.

Staff knew people well and positive, caring relationships had been developed. People were encouraged to express their views and they were involved in decisions about their care. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff understood how to support people whilst promoting independence.

People were provided with, and supported to access a range of leisure opportunities.

People said they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and they would be listened to.

There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Regular checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

The service was safe.

People told us they felt safe. People were happy to be with staff. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe administration and disposal of medicines. Medicines were stored securely.

The staff recruitment procedures in operation promoted people’s safety.

Staffing levels were adequate to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were appropriately trained and supervised to provide them with the skills needed to support people.

Staff knew about people’s personal preferences and gave people as much choice and control as possible.

People were supported to maintain their health by being provided with a balanced diet and having access to a range of healthcare professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

The service was caring.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

People living at the home said staff were very caring in their approach. We observed positive and caring relationships between staff and people using the service.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

The service was responsive.

People’s care plans contained a range of information and had been reviewed to keep them up to date.

A range of activities were provided for people, which were meaningful and promoted independence.

People living at the home were confident in reporting concerns to the registered manager and felt they would be listened to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 December 2017

The service was well led.

Staff told us communication was good within the home. Staff meetings were held to share information.

There were quality assurance and audit processes in place to make sure the home was running safely.

The service had a full range of policies and procedures available for staff so they had access to important information.