• Care Home
  • Care home

Abbey Ravenscroft Park Nursing Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

3-6 Ravenscroft Park, Barnet, Hertfordshire, EN5 4ND (020) 8449 5222

Provided and run by:
Abbey Ravenscroft Park Limited

Report from 15 April 2024 assessment

On this page

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 31 July 2024

We assessed a number of quality statements in the Well-led key question and found areas of concern. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. We identified a breach of the legal regulations. There were not always sufficient systems in place to supervise and promote the safety and quality of the service and people’s care experiences The provider was in the process of implementing new quality assurance systems so as to improve this. People and relatives spoke positively about the new managers and felt some improvements were being made with the service.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 3

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 3

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Freedom to speak up

Score: 3

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 3

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 1

Staff felt supported and spoke positively about the managers. The new managers were committed to making improvements to the service and ensuring people experienced good care. They described fostering a management culture of learning and improving and the provider had developed a senior management team, audits and culture to promote and implement this. However, we did not always see this culture in practice while observing some people’s lived experiences when we visited.

The provider’s quality assurance systems had not enabled the provider and managers to identify and take timely action to address areas for improvement which we found. For example, regarding people experiencing meaningful and dignified person-centred care, effective care plans, medicines support, safe care and treatment, and good governance. The provider was responsive when we raised these concerns with them and had been responsive to the concerns raised by the local authority. However, they had not identified all the shortfalls and the extent of these themselves through their own audits and checks. They had not established a person-centred culture at the home. The provider was now in the process of implementing new quality assurance systems so as to improve the governance of the service. For example, in the week before we visited the provider had introduced a new audit to identify improvements to how the home’s environment should promote good experiences for people living with dementia and mobility issues in future. However, this had not identified and addressed the issues we found when we visited. Feedback from relatives indicated some changes had taken place. Their comments included, “If you asked me few weeks ago what we think about this place we would say it’s awful, but we do see a lot of things improving”, “Today I came after almost 6 months and it feels like a better home, I think it’s all different carers than last time” and “The changes in management look promising.” We will return to check the provider has made these improvements.

Partnerships and communities

Score: 3

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 3

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.