Abbeycare and Nursing

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We observed people being offered day to day choices and consent being sought. People were receiving personalised support with achieved good outcomes for them. Care records were individualised, and staff used a range of communication methods to engage with people effectively. However, improvements were required in relation to recording consent.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care. People were given information in ways they could understand.

Staff knew about people’s health and social needs and preferences and gave them as much choice and control as possible.

People's needs and choices were assessed before they started using the service. The assessments included looking at their independent living skills as well as their needs. People’s equality and diversity needs and preferences were reflected to ensure their protected characteristics such as religion or sexuality were considered. People’s individual preferences and methods of communication were reflected in their care and support plans. People and their families were involved in the assessment process.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Relatives told us staff gained consent from people and we observed staff gaining peoples consent with their day to day care. While the people we spoke to told us they had choice and consented to their care our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards.

Care staff knew the principles of the MCA and understood how this impacted on the people they cared for. Staff understood the importance of supporting people to make their own decisions and obtaining consent from people before care was delivered. However, the management team confirmed that where restrictions were in place they had not always been assessed and reviewed to ensure the measures in place were the most appropriate. Whilst the registered manager was able to explain why this restriction was in place, it was not clear how people had been consulted or whether the provider had considered less restrictive options before limiting people's freedom.

The provider had not always followed the principles of the MCA. While we saw staff gaining consent from people with day-to-day care, records were not always in place. Where people lacked capacity to consent, appropriate assessments or consent records were not always completed.We found no documented evidence of decision-specific mental capacity assessments. This meant staff had made decisions on behalf of people, such as using movement monitoring equipment and bedrails, without confirming people's understanding of these decisions and attempting to confirm their consent. This meant there was an increased risk of people's rights not being upheld. Where people may have been deprived of their liberty, appropriate authorisations had not always been chased up.