Archived: Abbey Rose Nursing Home

Updated 25 January 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 06 and 08 December 2016 and was unannounced on the first day; we informed the provider that we would be visiting on the second day. The inspection was undertaken by two inspectors on the first day and one inspector on the second day.

Whilst planning our inspection we looked at the information we held about the service. This included notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also reviewed any complaints and concerns received from people that used the service and their relatives. We contacted the local authority and the clinical commissioning group that purchased the care on behalf of people. We also reviewed reports that the local authority send us on a regular basis.

During our inspection we spoke with five people that lived at the home, six relatives, the registered manager, a registered nurse, two care staff and the acting activities coordinator. We observed how staff supported people throughout the inspection to help us understand their experience of living at the home. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the care records of three people. This included medication administration records (MAR). Other records looked at included safety records, analysis of incidents, accidents and questionnaires and the provider’s system for ensuring medicines were handled safely. We also looked at compliments, complaints and safeguarding records. We looked at audits completed by the registered manager and the recruitment records of two new staff.

Updated 25 January 2017

This was an unannounced inspection, which took place on 06 and 08 December 2016. Our last inspection of this service took place on 15 December 2015 the service was rated as requiring improvements overall, with no breaches of legal requirements.

Abbey Rose is a privately owned care home situated in a residential area of Birmingham. Nursing care is provided for up to 38 older people who live at the home. There were 34 people living there at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

Visitors were welcomed in the home, so that people could maintain relationships with people that were important to them. Social activities were provided for people who wished to take part, although these activities were limited to week days only and not everyone felt the activities were suitable for them.

People received a safe service, because the provider had procedures in place to reduce the risks of harm to people. Staff were trained to help keep people safe and knew the procedures for ensuring people did not suffer abuse or harm.

People received their medicines as prescribed and were cared for in an environment that was well maintained to ensure they were safe.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff that were suitably recruited, trained, supervised, supported and monitored to ensure they cared for people effectively.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People had a choice of meals and were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health and well-being. Staff knew how to support people that may be at risk of not eating or drinking sufficient to maintain their health. People had access to health care professionals when they were unwell, so their health care needs were met.

People and their relatives were happy with the care they received and felt that staff were caring and compassionate towards them. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible.

People and their relatives were involved in planning and agreeing their care needs, so they knew what care was being provided. Where people had concerns about their care, there were effective procedures in place to handle these concerns. People were confident that any concerns they raised would be acted on and resolved to their satisfaction.

People received a service that was well managed, by a stable management team and there were systems in place to ensure the care people received was monitored. People knew who the registered manager was and felt that she was open and visible in the home. This gave people confidence in the service. People had the opportunity to comment on the quality of the service they received.