We carried out a review of the data available to us about Abbeycrest Nursing Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Abbeycrest Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Abbeycrest is a residential care home that was providing nursing and personal care to 69 people at the time of the inspection. The home can accommodate up to 70 people in one adapted building.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt safe in Abbeycrest and there were systems and processes to protect people from the risk of harm. Medicines were managed safely and people received these as prescribed. Systems for ensuring people's environment was safe were in place. A robust recruitment and selection process was in place and there were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. Infection control measures were in place.
People’s care, treatment and support had been assessed in line with best practice guidance. The service worked in partnership with other organisations to contribute to the development of best practice.
Management and staff worked together and with other professionals to ensure people received joined up care. There were champions within the service who actively supported staff to make sure people experienced good healthcare outcomes. Staff training was developed and delivered around people’s individual needs with specialist training provided where required. Staff told us they felt supported, had regular supervisions and were encouraged to develop their skills. There was a strong emphasis on the importance of eating and drinking well. The service provided good quality food with a variety of different options to choose from each day.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People's rights to make their own decisions were respected and people were in control of their support. This ensured that people’s human and legal rights were respected.
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Comments included, “Staff are so kind, I can’t praise them enough. I must emphasise how kind the carers are, carers are always smiling, very gentle.” People were treated with dignity and their choices respected. The service promoted a person-centred service that valued people as individuals.
The provider had quality assurance systems and processes to measure and monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement. These systems also supported people to stay safe by assessing and mitigating risks, ensuring that people were cared for in a person-centred way. People and their relatives told us they thought the service was well managed and they received high quality care that met their needs
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 4 May 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Why the service is rated good:
People were safe living in the service. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed. There were sufficient staff to ensure people’s needs were met in a timely manner. Risks to people were assessed and there were plans in place to manage the risks.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice. People received support from staff who had access to training. This ensured they had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.
People had access to food and drink to meet their nutritional needs. Where people required support from health professionals this was sought in a timely manner to ensure people’s health and well-being was managed effectively.
Staff supported people in a kind and caring manner. People had developed positive relationships with staff who knew them well. People and their relatives were encouraged to be involved in all decisions about people’s care.
Care plans reflected people’s needs and staff followed guidance to ensure people’s needs were met. People’s changing needs were responded to promptly and relatives told us people’s condition had improved when they had moved to the service.
The service was well led by a registered manager who promoted a caring, person-centred approach. Everyone was positive about the management of the service. There was an open culture that encouraged feedback to improve the service.
Abbeycrest Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation for up to 70 older people who require personal or nursing care. The home has four units of which two provides specialist dementia care. On the day of our visit there were 69 people living in the service.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 November 2014. At our previous inspection in August 2013 the provider was meeting the requirements of the law in all the standards.
The registered manager has been registered since July 2013. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were kept safe by staff who knew how to identify abuse. There were signs displayed throughout the service informing people and those who represented them of how to raise concerns. The service carried out safe recruitment practices by ensuring relevant checks were undertaken before staff could begin to work. This meant people were protected from receiving unsafe or inappropriate care, treatment and support. Risk assessments were put in place to manage identified risks and clearly showed what actions staff should take to minimise the risk of harm and injury to people. These were regularly reviewed and updated. There was sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. We observed call bells were responded to in prompt manner. Medicines were safely managed and regular checks were undertaken to ensure the building and safety procedures such as checking fire exits and carrying out fire drills regularly occurred.
People received care, treatment and support from staff who were supported effectively in their jobs roles. Staff spoke positively about their learning experience and told us they were clear about the requirements of the job roles. This was supported in staff records which evidenced they had received regular supervision, appraisals and had undertaken relevant training.
Procedures were in place to ensure there was staff with the right skills to meet people’s individual needs. The service acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of (DoLS). This meant people who may lack capacity to make specific decisions were protected and authorisation was sought before people were lawfully deprived of their liberty. Care records evidenced people giving consent before care, treatment and support was delivered.
People told us they had a positive experience in regards to food. We observed people were supported to have enough to eat and drink and were offered a wide variety to choices. Staff were engaged with people throughout the lunch time period and had good knowledge of people’s food preferences. The food on offer was prepared by staff who were trained and knew how to make nutritional healthy meals. There were effective measures in place to support people who were at risk of malnutrition or who had specialist dietary needs. This included the involvement of nutritional specialists and other relevant health professionals. The chef had recently been recognised by the organisation for their work.
People spoke positively about the care they received and were supported by staff who had good knowledge of their care, treatment and support needs. Care was planned around people’s choices and personal preferences. This was observed during our visit and evidenced in care records reviewed. We observed people being treated in a respectful and dignified manner with care needs being met with consideration and patience. We saw staff calming and re-assuring people who were confused and distressed with sensitivity and kindness. Observational records showed the service monitored staff practices to ensure people were being cared for appropriately.
People received care that was responsive to their needs. People told us they were listened to. This was supported by care records which showed people and those who represented them were involved in identifying what their care and support needs were. This covered areas such as, likes, dislikes, cultural, religious and spiritual support required. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly carried out, up to date and reflected people’s changing needs.
Informal meetings took place with people and management. This gave people the opportunity to talk in a relaxed environment about any ideas or concerns. A review of meetings notes showed discussions held and actions taken.
People told us the service dealt with their complaints satisfactorily. A review of complaints register showed all complaints were investigated and appropriate action taken.
The service ensured people received consistent co-ordinated, person centred care when they moved between different services. This was evidenced in hospital transfer information sheets completed for people being admitted into hospital.
People were supported to follow their interests. A range of activities were on offer to meet people’s social needs. The service had a structured program to improve people’s well-being through outdoor activities. For example a pathway was constructed from the home to a nearby park to give people easy access. The service’s ‘Make a Wish’ project was established to enable people to do things they had always wanted to.
At the time of inspection we found there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to cover the home effectively and to meet people's needs.
We spoke with seven staff during our visit. One staff member said 'It's been much better with the extra member of staff. It means there is always someone in the lounge with residents.' Another staff member told us 'It used to be very busy in the evenings but having additional staff has made it easier.'
There was a relaxed atmosphere on all four units at the time of inspection and residents were content and cheerful. We observed that people were moving freely around the home and staff were supporting them appropriately.
We spoke with seven relatives who were visiting at the time of inspection. One relative told us, 'We visit at different times of the day. It seems quiet and relaxed tonight.' Another relative said 'Staff are great. They do a good job but there isn't always enough of them.' Another person said "I have no complaints. The staff work very hard. I think they do an excellent job." One relative said 'Lovely, friendly, hard working staff what more can I say.' One person who uses the service told us "I cannot speak highly enough about the staff."
People had been fully assessed prior to admission, to ensure the home could effectively meet their needs. They experienced safe and appropriate care that was effectively documented. Robust checks were undertaken during recruitment of staff. This ensured people who live at the service were protected from harm. The staff team were well supported by management and had opportunities to enhance their knowledge and skills with regular training.
We saw the service had systems in place to monitor their compliance with regulations. There were regular audits carried out by management. The views of people who use the service were regularly sought.