22 Abbey Drive (West)

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 cared for in a safe environment, however repairs and maintenance were needed across the service. At the time of the assessment, we found that the environment was not meeting one person’s sensory needs, however assurance of improvement was received from the provider to address this concern. Processes were in place to review the safety of the environment and fire risks had been assessed. We made a recommendation to the manager that the local fire service complete an assessment of the building to ensure residents were safe. The premises was clean and there was an effective approach to assessing and managing the risk of infection. There were clear roles and responsibilities around infection prevention and control within the staff team.

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.

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

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

People did not raise concerns about the safety of the environment. There were no safety hazards impacting on people’s use of the service. One person told us, “[person] is supported to live in a safe environment.”

Staff were positive about the service and felt people were safe. Saff told us that they raised maintenance issues to the management team, however in some cases, they felt action to address the larger issues with the environment were slow. The provider was able to give assurances that action was now being taken to assess the concerns raised regarding the environment and work was underway to provide renovation where needed.

Areas of the service need maintenance and repair. Cosmetic damage was seen throughout the property; however, this did not seem to affect the people. Work was needed to ensure the environment met the needs of the people. For example, at the time of the inspection one bathroom was out of order and did not meet the sensory needs of the person. However, reassurances have been provided by the provider that this will be addressed. Action is being taken to improve the environment overall.

Processes and procedures were in place to ensure the safety of the environment. All safety certificates were in date and valid. Fire drills were being carried out and fire risk assessments were detailed and provided clear information to the reader. The environment had been risk assessed and action plans were in place to address the shortfalls with the environment. Provider level audits were taking place for oversight of the service.

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.

People told us the service was clean and tidy. One person told us, “the service is clean and tidy and [person] has his room how he wants it.”

Staff showed good understanding of effective infection, prevention and control procedures. Staff told us that the service was clean. One staff member told us, “We have a cleaning folder that is completed by staff with a tick list to ensure a clean service.” Staff said they had received training in infection, prevention and control and were aware of when PPE was to be used. One staff member told us, “Plastic gloves and aprons are available, and PPE is always in stock.”

The service was clean and tidy. Staff managed the daily cleaning well and showed good understanding of how to minimise the risk of infection.

Processes were in place to ensure oversight of infection control procedures. An IPC policy was in place and the cleanliness of the service was checked through audits and regular walkarounds. We found gaps in the cleaning schedule records however this was already being addressed by the new manager.

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