Abbots Lawn

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 were safe at Abbots Lawn and this was reflected in their comments and feedback. The provider had a proactive approach to learning within the service. When things did go wrong, this was evidence by staff and reviewed by the registered manager so people were kept safe and improvements could be made going forward. Staff had a strong knowledge of safeguarding, how to recognise the signs of potential abuse and reported this appropriately. People were involved in shaping their care plans and this included managing and minimising risks where possible. There was clear guidance available to staff to promote people’s safety without restricting them unnecessarily. The environment was clean and tidy, with regular safety check having taken place, especially around fire safety. There were enough staff of the right skill set to keep people safe and meet their needs. People and their relatives spoke positively about staff and how they were responsive to each need. Medicines were managed safely and delivered in a way which met people’s preferences. The registered manager and provider had good oversight of this so any issues could be identified and addressed rapidly.

This service scored 75 (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 they could tell staff about things that concerned them. They were confident that changes would happen if they did. They said, “Staff respond to anything raised,” and, “They are quick to listen.”

Staff recognised incidents and reported them appropriately. Accidents and incidents were investigated appropriately to ensure actions were taken to reduce the risk of recurrence. Staff spoke positively about the learning culture at the service.

There were processes in place to monitor accidents and incidents affecting people’s safety. When an incident occurred, action was taken across the service to ensure that lessons were learnt and staff improved practices to keep people safe.

People were supported appropriately with health appointments. A relative told us they were pleased that their relative had, “Their teeth cleaned when the dentist visited,” and, “The optician had visited and [Person] had new glasses.”

Staff worked closely with external professionals to ensure people’s needs were suitably met. Staff had made appropriate referrals to other health and social care services were needed to enable people safe continuity of their care.

We received positive feedback from partner agencies who told us that staff at Abbots Lawn contacted them when necessary to ensure safe care delivery.

The service worked well with external professionals and commissioners to ensure people received the appropriate care they required. Systems were in place to ensure smooth transitions between services when this was required.

People and their relatives told us they were happy with the service and felt safe around staff. We received comments such as, “I feel safe,”; “He looks really well,” and, “He looks happy.”

Staff followed the local authority policy on safeguarding; this was available to all staff as guidance for dealing with any such concerns. There was a whistle-blowing policy so if staff had concerns, they could report these. They told us they were confident their concerns would be listened to.

People were comfortable in the presence of staff and we observed warm interactions between them. When people became distressed, we saw staff respond quickly and gently to the person using distraction and de-escalation techniques to minimise the risk of adverse incidents occurring.

Systems and processes were in place to identify, review and investigate safeguarding matters. Appropriate action had been taken when any concerns were raised. Documents showed how the registered manager maintained oversight of any safeguarding matters and ensured learning from these. The registered manager also kept track of those who were under Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and, when these needed to be renewed, had made appropriate referrals.

Risks to people were assessed on admission to the service and regularly updated. Risk assessments were completed. Where risks had been identified these had been assessed and actions were in place to mitigate them. People and their relatives told us they were involved in decision making including around risks, where appropriate.

Staff provided support in a way which minimised risk for people. For example, where people were at risk of choking, staff sought input from a speech and language therapist (SaLT). This included advice on what people required to safely maintain their nutrition and hydration. This information was translated into people’s care plans and staff we spoke with were aware of people's individual needs.

Where equipment had been prescribed to minimise risks to people, we observed this in place and being used as needed. For example, where people were at high risk of pressure damage, staff had access to appropriate nursing equipment to reduce the risk. Pressure relieving mattresses were in place.

Care plans were robust and clearly considered risks to people. Clear guidance was provided to staff in how to minimise risks to people but still encourage them to be as independent as possible. Where appropriate, people had been involved in shaping their own risk assessments around their care, including giving views on how they want to be supported in times of distress or discomfort.

People appeared at ease in the service. Staff used equipment appropriately to promote people's safety. For example, we saw that when people rang their call bells staff were very quick to respond and assist them.

Staff supported people to maintain a safe environment which was important to them. Staff told us, “We have looked into various things that make the environment more comfortable for people with dementia.” For example, “All pictures have been reframed so they are not reflective.” Staff had received fire awareness training and understood the actions they should take in the event of a fire.

We saw the environment had been decorated with the needs of people living with dementia in mind. Corridors and bedroom doors were painted in different colours to assist people who maybe experiencing disorientation. The environment was clean, tidy and well maintained.

The provider had a robust routine of environment checks in place. Appropriate maintenance audits were effective and completed within the allocated and suitable timeframes to promote a safe environment. Checks such as fire alarm and water safety were completed regularly. People had personal emergency evacuation plans in place which were up to date and personalised to their needs.

People and their relatives told us they were happy with the staffing numbers. They confirmed that people’s care needs were being met by staff who were well trained and knew them well. Comments included, “The staff are amazing,” and, “Staff are quick to listen.”

Conversation with staff evidenced that they were knowledgeable and competent. Staff were positive about the training opportunities available. They told us that they were happy with the level of training provided and felt that it gave them the skills and knowledge needed to provided good care. They said, “The training is really good,” and, “There is enough staff. Everyone gets on.” Staff were recruited safely and in line with the provider’s policy.

Staffing levels were appropriate to meet people's needs and there were sufficient numbers of skilled and experienced staff deployed to keep people safe. We saw staff supported people in a relaxed manner and spent time with them. During our visit we saw staff were available and responded quickly to people. People did not wait for long periods of time when they required assistance.

The registered manager kept oversight regarding staff training to ensure this was kept up to date. Regular competency checks were completed to monitor staff knowledge and practice. Appraisal and supervision process were in place to allow discussion around skill development and address any concerns. Staff told us they found these productive.

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.

People’s medicines were stored and administered safely. Medicines were stored securely following current guidelines for the storage of medicines. Each person had a medication administration record (MAR) detailing each item of prescribed medication and the time they should be given. Those who could, told us they received their medicines on time and in a manner that was personal to them.

Staff told us of the training they had received in medicines handling which included observation of practice to ensure their competence. All the staff we spoke to regarding the administration of medicines told us that they felt confident and competent. Staff completed the MARs appropriately, for example staff waited to check people had taken their medicines before signing the administration records.

The provider had robust procedures in place to ensure safe delivery of medicines. There was a dedicated room for storing people’s medicines. The room was clean and well organised. We saw that a lockable fridge was available to store medicines that required lower storage temperatures. Daily temperatures of the fridge were taken and recorded to ensure the fridge remained at a safe temperature. The medicines storeroom was locked when not in use and during the medicines administration round the trolley was locked when unattended. There were safe systems in place for the receipt and disposal of medicines. A record was kept of all medicines received and removed from the service. We checked a sample of medicines and found the stock tallied with the records kept. Regular audits also took place.