We carried out a review of the data available to us about Abbeyfield Deben Extra Care Society Limited 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 Abbeyfield Deben Extra Care Society Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Abbeyfield Deben Extra Care Society Limited is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 24 people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection there were 22 people living in the service. The service does not provide nursing care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
There were systems to assess and mitigate the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. People received their medicines when they needed them, and medicines were managed safely. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment processes were undertaken. Infection control processes in place, helped to reduce the risk of cross infection.
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 were supported by staff who were provided with training to meet their needs. People’s dietary and health care needs were assessed and met. Where concerns about people’s health were identified, they were supported to have access to health care services. The environment was well maintained and accessible for the people who lived there.
People were cared for by kind and considerate staff. People were consulted about the care they were provided with and their choices were acted on. People’s rights to privacy, independence and dignity were met.
People’s care needs were assessed, planned for and met. People’s choices about their end of life decisions were documented. People had access to social activities to provide stimulation and reduce the risks of loneliness and isolation. There was a complaints procedure in place and complaints and concerns were addressed.
There were systems to assess and monitor the service people received. This helped the management team to identify and address shortfalls. People’s views were sought about the service and these were used to drive improvement.
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 12 April 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Abbeyfield Deben Extra Care Society Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Enforcement
Since the last inspection in February 2017 we have prosecuted the registered provider for an offence under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Regulation 12(1) refers to failure to provide safe care or treatment resulting in avoidable harm to person using a service or exposes a service user to a significant risk of exposure to avoidable harm. Prior to our last inspection a person fell down stairs at the service and died. The registered provider pleaded guilty and were fined at Magistrates court in September 2019. Our previous inspection of 23 February 2017 (published 12 April 2017) was prompted in part by this incident. Because the incident was subject to a criminal investigation and as a result the previous inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk related to the environment. At that inspection we examined those risks and found the service had assessed and mitigated the risks of avoidable harm.
The 2014 Regulations make it a criminal offence to fail to comply with Regulation 12(1) where the failure to provide safe care or treatment results in avoidable harm to a service user or exposes a service user to a significant risk of exposure to avoidable harm. The 2014 Regulations took effect on 01 April 2015 and coincided with a transfer of enforcement responsibility for health and safety incidents in the health and social care sector from the Health and Safety Executive and local authorities to CQC.
At this inspection of 1 October 2019, we checked that people were safe and found the service assessed risks to people and took sufficient action to reduce the risks.
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.
The service had a registered manager. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were not always supported to be as independent as they were able. People were supported in the least restrictive way possible but were not always supported to exercise maximum choice and control. Care plans did not always contain detailed information about how people wanted to live their lives or their personal history.
People felt safe living in the service. Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and knew what action they should take if they had any concerns. Staffing levels ensured that people received the support they required to keep them safe and recruitment procedures protected people from receiving unsafe care from care staff unsuited to the role. People had risk assessments in place which identified and managed people's known risks, and appropriate arrangements were in place to manage and store people's medicines.
People received care from staff that were supported to carry out their roles to meet the assessed needs of people living at the service. Staff received training in areas that enabled them to understand and meet the care needs of each person. People had their healthcare needs managed in a way that was appropriate for each person and people's nutritional needs were supported.
People received support from staff that treated them well and prioritised their needs. People were relaxed and comfortable around staff. People were encouraged to maintain good relationships with people that were important to them and the service was using modern technology to support this.
Systems were in place for the home to receive and act on feedback. There were policies and procedures in place to support the provision of good care and support.
This inspection took place on 12 May 2015 and was unannounced.
The service provides support and care for up to 24 people. On the day of our inspection there were 23 people living in the service.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us that they felt safe living in the service. They told us they were treated with dignity and respect. We saw staff interacting with people and they did so in a kind, caring and sensitive manner. Staff showed a good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and were clear about the actions they would take to protect people.
Recruitment checks had been carried out before staff started work. Where people had raised concerns at a residents meeting regarding the number of staff available to support them at particular times of day this had been addressed by the manager who was taking concerns to the executive committee for the service.
There were suitable arrangement for the safe storage, management and disposal of medicines. People received their medicines safely.
We found that detailed assessment had been carried out and that the care plans were developed around the needs and preferences of the individual. We saw that risks were assessed and where appropriate plans on how the risks were to be managed were put in place. People told us that they were supported with taking every day risks.
Where people had expressed concerns about the number of staff on duty to provide care, particularly at times of the day where demand for support was concentrated the manager was addressing this.
Meal times were communal affairs. Staff ate with people, any visiting relatives and friends. This promoted an inclusive and relaxed atmosphere. People’s individual nutritional needs were assessed and appropriate action taken if concerns were identified.
We found that people’s health care needs were met. People told us that they had access to a range of healthcare providers such as their GP, dentist, chiropodist and optician. The service kept clear records about all healthcare visits.
Staff treated people with respect and ensured their dignity. They were aware of and respected people’s preferences as to how they wished to spend their time.
People told us that the service organised a variety of entertainments and excursions. They told us they were involved in suggesting these events and enjoyed them when they took place.
Regular residents and relatives meetings were held. Where actions or improvements had been suggested by people at these meetings we saw that the service took action to address any deficiencies.
The service had effective quality assurance systems. Were these identified areas for improvement we saw that these were addressed.
We found that the provider had made improvements to the way they supported their staff. The provider had taken appropriate steps to implement effective systems to train and supervise their staff. We were satisfied that the provider had taken all necessary actions to meet with the regulations for supporting workers.
We saw that staff asked the people who used the service if they wished to participate in activities and receive support to meet their personal needs. We observed that staff gave people choices. People had good choices of meals offered and received good nutritional support.
The service had good infection control procedures in place and there had been no complaints since our last inspection.
We found shortfalls in the provider's support of workers.