Abbots Lawn

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People were at the centre of their own care, and it was shaped around their needs and wishes. People spoke positively about staff and how they responded proactively to anything they needed. People felt listened to and knew how to raise a complaint if they needed to. The provider had a robust complaints procedure in place and any concerns had been responded to appropriately. They also kept oversight of any concerns in order to develop learning for staff where needed. People and their relatives were encouraged to give feedback and this was used to make improvements within the service. Staff had undertaken training in diversity and inclusion, they respected people’s individuality and supported them to overcome any barriers they may face when accessing services.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and their relatives told us that staff were responsive to their needs and delivered person-centred care in the way they wanted it. A relative told us, “It’s a great place, we are really pleased.” People had up to date, individual, person-centred care plans which reflected latest best practice guidance, and these were updated to reflect any changes to people’s needs. Daily records showed people were receiving the care they required as identified in their care plans.

Staff knew people’s individual abilities and capabilities, which assisted staff to give person centred care. They were able to tell us in detail what support people needed and what their preferences were. For example, how people liked their drinks and what activities people liked to take part in.

We saw there was a relaxed atmosphere at Abbots Lawn. People enjoyed the company of staff. People’s care was not rushed enabling staff to spend quality time with them and encourage them to do things for themselves. Staff walked with people at their pace and when communicating with them they got down to their level and gave eye contact. They spent time listening to them and responded to their questions. They explained what they were doing and offered reassurance when anyone appeared anxious.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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

People were supported to continue engaging in activities and hobbies that interested them and their preferences were sought through conversations with them and their relatives. A relative told us, “[Person] had enjoyed going out to the pub recently.” People were given the opportunity to give their views and feedback on the support received.

Staff told us that the senior leadership team were open to suggestions, and they felt confident any issues raised would be dealt with. They were given regular opportunities through handovers and staff meetings to express both their own ideas and any that people had conveyed to them during day-to-day interactions.

The provider and registered manager had processes in place to gain feedback from people and their relatives. Residents’ meetings took place regularly and suggested changes were taken onboard by management. For example, people had expressed where they enjoyed going on trips and this had been implemented. There was also a robust complaints procedure in place to allow people to express any concerns they may have. Documents showed that this has been followed effectively.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People’s needs were considered, and any barriers they may face to care, support and treatment were addressed. For example, people’s communication needs were assessed and recorded as part of the care planning process, then amendments made if necessary to ensure people were involved in shaping their care.

The senior leadership team were aware of human rights principles and had taken action to ensure these were adhered to. This included if people had any needs relating to protected characteristics such as religious preferences. This was clearly conveyed to staff through care planning or meetings to ensure people’s voices were heard.

The provider had processes in place to gather information about people’s needs and preferences. Through the process of developing a person’s care plan with them, any preferences or barriers they expressed were noted so action could be taken to minimise these and promote equity across the service. When resident meetings were held, staff and management still discussed with those who preferred not to attend so they could still participate and give feedback.

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