You are here

Abbeyfield Hope Bank View Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 November 2018

The inspection took place on 27 September and 2 October 2018 and was announced. This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered.

This service provides care to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care service.

Not everyone using Abbeyfield Hope Bank View receives the 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. There were 59 people receiving support with personal care when we inspected.

The service had a registered manager. 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. People and staff told us the registered manager was approachable and supportive.

The registered manager had not submitted some required statutory notifications to the CQC. We are dealing with this matter separately.

People gave extremely positive feedback about the care they received. We observed there were good relationships between people and staff and they regularly socialised in the communal areas.

People and staff said the service was a safe place to live. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and were aware of the whistle blowing procedure. However, staff told us they did not have any concerns about people’s safety.

Positive told us there were enough staff on duty and that they responded quickly when they needed assistance. They also said staff were reliable and usually turned up on time for planned care calls. The provider had effective recruitment procedures so that new staff were recruited safely.

Medicines were managed safely. People told us they received their medicines on time. Accurate records were kept showing the medicines staff had given to people.

The provider had up to date emergency procedures. Incidents and accidents were fully investigated and action taken to keep people safe.

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

People’s needs had been assessed and this was used to develop care plans. Care plans were detailed and described how people wanted their care provided.

Staff were supported well and received the training they needed for their respective roles.

People received the support they required with meeting their nutritional needs. One meal each day was provided as part of the tenancy agreement. Staff supported people to prepare other meals throughout the day.

Staff supported people to access health care services when needed. Care records showed people had input from various health professionals, such as GPs, community nurses and speech and language therapists.

People gave only positive feedback about the service but confirmed they knew how to complain if needed. A small number of complaints had been received which had been fully investigated and resolved.

Quality assurance checks were completed and these were effective in identifying and resolving issues. There were opportunities for people and staff to share their views about the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 November 2018

The service was safe.

People and staff said the service was safe.

Staff knew about safeguarding and the whistle blowing procedure, including how to report concerns.

There were enough staff deployed so that people received their care in a timely way. New staff were recruited safely.

Medicines were managed safely.

There were procedures to deal with emergency situations. Incidents and accidents were thoroughly investigated.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 November 2018

The service was effective.

People were asked to give consent before receiving care.

People�s needs had been assessed to determine the care they needed and wanted to receive.

Staff had good support and were provided with the training they needed.

People were supported to meet their nutritional and healthcare needs.

Staff supported people to access health care services when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 November 2018

The service was caring.

People were happy with the care they received.

People described staff as kind and caring.

People were treated with dignity and respect and staff encouraged them to be independent.

Care records were personalised and included information about people�s preferences.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 November 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were detailed and personalised to reflect people�s wishes.

Activities were organised within the service which people could access if they wanted.

People knew how to complain if required. Complaints had been fully investigated and resolved.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2018

The service was not always well led.

Some required statutory notifications had not been submitted to the CQC.

People and staff described the registered manager as approachable and supportive.

The provider had a system of effective quality assurance checks.

People and staff were able to provide feedback about the service and the care provided.