You are here

Archived: Abbotts Court Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

This inspection took place on 27 August 2015 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

Abbotts Court provides care and accommodation for up to 39 older people and people with a dementia type illness. On the day of our inspection there were 29 people using the service.

The home did not have a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The home had a new manager in post who had applied with CQC to be the registered manager.

Abbotts Court was last inspected by CQC on 18 June 2013 and was compliant.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.

Accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns had been recorded appropriately and analysis carried out, for example, on falls.

Medicines were administered appropriately and people received their medicines at the time they needed them.

Staff training was up to date and staff received regular supervisions and appraisals, which meant that staff were properly supported to provide care to people who used the service.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They aim to make sure that people in care homes, hospitals and supported living are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. We discussed DoLS with the registered manager and looked at records. We found the provider was following the requirements in the DoLS.

People who used the service, and family members, had provided consent to care and treatment.

People who used the service, and family members, were complimentary about the standard of care at Abbotts Court.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

We saw that the home had a full programme of activities in place for people who used the service.

Care records showed that people’s needs were assessed before they moved into Abbotts Court and care plans were written in a person centred way.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

The service had strong links with the local community.

The provider had a robust quality assurance system in place and gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

The service was safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people using the service and the provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place.

Thorough investigations had been carried out in response to accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns.

Medicines were administered appropriately and people received their medicines at the time they needed them.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

The service was effective.

Staff training was up to date and staff received regular supervisions and appraisals.

The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People who used the service, and family members, had provided consent to care and treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

The service was caring.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

People were encouraged to be independent and care for themselves where possible.

People were well presented and staff talked with people in a polite and respectful manner.

People had been involved in writing their care plans and their wishes were taken into consideration.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

The service was responsive.

Risk assessments were in place where required.

The home had a full programme of activities in place for people who used the service.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 October 2015

The service was well led.

The service had good links with the local community.

The provider had a robust quality assurance system in place and gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources.