Abbeywell Court

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

People told us they were not always involved in improving the service. Staff told us there was a culture of learning at the care home. There were effective systems in place to improve care and learn lessons when things go wrong. People told us they felt safe, and staff requested support from external services when needed. Staff told us people were safe and received good care. Professionals working with the care home told us the provider works well with their service in order to deliver safe care. The provider had effective systems and procedures in place to provide safe care.

This service scored 56 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were not always involved in improving the service. One relative told us, “When [my relative] needed changes to their care, it was not always explained to us why certain changes had been made. Although it has been raised as an issue previously, we have not seen improvements with communication from management to relatives.” Another relative told us, “There doesn’t seem to have been a relative’s meeting for a while and, although the nurses are brilliant and update care plans when needed, it wouldn’t be easy to raise issues with the manager as they are not always visible.”

Staff told us there was a culture of learning at the care home. One staff member told us, “When a person’s falls risk increased recently, we were able meet their needs better by supporting them to move to another room where staff could monitor them and use redirection methods when needed. Another staff member told us, “We attend team meetings and 1-1 meetings regularly. We discuss people’s changing needs in daily handovers and have filled out staff questionnaires which the managers evaluate.” Another staff member told us, “I have had the training I need to perform my role. I attend 1-1 meetings with the deputy manager where we discuss my training needs and improvements we need to make.”

There were effective systems in place to improve care and learn lessons when things go wrong. Following recommendations from quality assurance visits from the local authority, the provider reviewed people’s care plans to ensure they were person centred and contained more detail to guide staff better about how to care for people and respond to issues. The provider responded to accidents and incidents by investigating them and ensuring and learning lessons. Where required, this led to changes in people’s care which were shared with staff in team meetings and 1-1 meetings with senior staff. The provider analysed themes and trends from incidents. For example, analysis of people’s falls led people’s risk assessments being updated, mobility equipment was put in place and referrals were made to the appropriate health agencies when needed. Staff meetings were used to discuss where improvements were required. For example, in one team meeting, where issues were identified with managing people’s medications, staff were debriefed and reminded to record the reasons why medication had not been given. Staff were also reminded to report safety incidents to the management team. The provider used the duty of candour and responded to complaints appropriately, when needed.

People told us they felt safe, and staff requested support from external services when needed. One person told us, “I feel safe. I have a sensor mat in my room as I have had falls before I moved here.” One relative told us, “I can't fault the carers who are compassionate and respectful with residents.” Another relative told us, “[My relative] is safe. They have one to one care which has reduced due to there being less risk at night and there is a sensor mat in their room. [My relative] had lost a lot of weight before moving here. Staff worked well with the GP and the dietician, and they have regained weight now.”

Staff told us people were safe and received good care. One staff member told us, “There are a lot of people at risk of falling but we minimise the risk as much as possible. People have sensor mats and mobility equipment to promote independence and we check on them regularly to make sure they are safe.” Another staff member told us, “One person has a skin condition and we referred to the tissue viability team. We have followed their recommendations and treatment plan and the skin is now improving really well.” Another staff member told us, “People are safe. People have assistive technology or mobility equipment however if somebody does have a fall, we follow the falls protocol where carers request a nurse using the emergency buzzer, the nurse checks the person over and calls emergency services if the person is injured. We then record details of the incident and analyse it to keep the person safe in future.”

Professionals working with the care home told us the provider works well with their service in order to deliver safe care. One professional told us, “The care home made a referral to us and provided enough detail about the person’s condition in order for us to support them effectively. Another professional told us, “The care home staff contact us in a timely way, are knowledgeable about individual residents and are responsive to our suggestions.” Another professional told us, “We have been visiting the care home and they have been making improvements following our recommendations.”

The provider had effective systems and procedures in place to provide safe care. Care plans and risk assessments were person centred and guided staff how to meet people’s needs and risks. Although relatives told us they were involved in giving their views about people’s care through a ‘resident of the day’ system, it was not always made clear to them this led to their care plan being reviewed or updated. When we fed this back to the management team, they put a plan in place to improve communication with relatives. Where people lacked mental capacity and were not able to use call bells to request staff support, risk assessments had not always been completed. The registered manager had identified this as an issue through local authority visits and was in the process of ensuring all risk assessments were in place for call bells where required. There were systems in place to monitor people’s conditions where required and staff acted on concerns. For example, where a person required support and monitoring with eating and drinking had difficulty swallowing, a referral was made to the Speech and Language Therapy team. Where a person’s risk of falls had increased, the person was supported to move to a room in another part of the building where there was more staff oversight, a falls sensor mat was put in place and a referral was made to social services to review the person’s care. People’s changing needs and risks were discussed in daily handover meetings. Where investigations identified safeguarding concerns, these were referred to the local authority safeguarding and team and the care quality commission were notified. People had Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEP) in place.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.