CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Abbeygate Rest Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments were reviewed monthly, staffing was considered sufficient, and medicines were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff supported access to healthcare, provided food and drink support, and understood the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and looked after them well. Inspectors found people were involved in care decisions and were treated with privacy, dignity and respect.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was described as person-centred, with support for communication, activities and relationships. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff understood the service, used audits and reflection to identify improvements, and involved people, relatives and staff through meetings and surveys.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with responsiveness improved since the previous inspection.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection on 10 March 2020. One inspector spoke with people, a relative, staff and an outside professional. They also reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good. Inspectors found people felt safe and happy, staff were kind, medicines were managed safely, and people had access to healthcare, activities and support suited to their needs.
The overall rating stayed Good from the previous inspection in 2017. The Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. The day care service in the same building was not regulated by the CQC and was not covered by this rating.
People felt safe
People said there were enough staff and that they felt safe and happy. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse or avoidable harm.
“People told us there were enough staff to meet their needs and they felt safe and happy.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind. Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance and found people were involved in decisions about their care.
“People told us staff were kind, and looked after them well; several people said they "Would not want to be anywhere else” from the report
Good access to healthcare
The home worked with doctors, nurses, occupational therapists, dentists and other agencies to support people's health needs.
“People were well supported to access a range of appropriate healthcare needs as required, including oral care.” from the report
Activities and communication
People could choose from daily activities and individual interests. Visual cards and staff knowledge helped people who could not speak or were living with dementia to communicate.
“People told us there were a variety of activities offered daily; they could choose to engage with these or not.” from the report
Responsive service
The Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Inspectors found care was organised around people's choices and needs.
“At this inspection this key question has now improved to Good” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's risks, such as falls or choking?
- 02How will you support my relative's particular communication needs, especially if they cannot speak or are living with dementia?
- 03What activities would suit my relative, and how would you support them to join in or choose not to?
- 04How will you involve me and my relative in decisions about care and respond if we raise a concern?
- 05How will you coordinate healthcare, including doctors, nurses, dentists and other professionals, for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the separate day care service in the same building was not regulated by the CQC. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 April 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but activities and stimulation were not consistently provided.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 2 and 24 August 2017. They observed care, spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, effective, caring and well-led were all rated Good. People generally felt safe, staff were kind, medicines were managed safely, care plans were useful and healthcare support was arranged when needed.
Responsive was rated Requires Improvement. Activities were listed, but they did not always happen. Inspectors found no record of an activity on 13 of the first 23 days reviewed, and some people spent long periods with little to do.
The overall Good rating means the home was meeting most important standards at the time of this inspection. It does not mean every part of the service was consistently good, particularly activities and stimulation.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance, protecting privacy and encouraging independence and choice.
“There was a warm, relaxed atmosphere and staff supported people in a kind and friendly way.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely. The provider also acted quickly to improve records for creams.
“People's medicines were managed safely and staff worked closely with local healthcare services to ensure people had access to any specialist support they required.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People had food choices that took account of their preferences and dietary needs. Staff involved local healthcare professionals when needed.
“People were provided with food and drink of good quality that met their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Open management
The manager responded positively when inspectors raised concerns about call bells and activities. Staff said they felt supported and that the team worked well together.
“Throughout our inspection, the registered manager demonstrated an extremely candid and responsive approach.” from the report
Activities were not reliable
needs fixingPlanned activities did not always take place. Inspectors saw people sitting for extended periods with little or nothing to do, and the provider accepted that more action was needed.
“The provision of communal activities and other forms of stimulation was inconsistent and did not fully meet people's needs and preferences.” from the report
Some call bell delays
needs fixingMost people felt staffing was sufficient, but some people said they sometimes waited for help after using their call bell. The manager changed the recruitment plan in response.
“Some people told us they sometimes experienced a delay in response when they used their call bell.” from the report
Some care plan changes were not fully recorded
minorCare plans were well organised and regularly reviewed, but the manager agreed to ensure that changes identified during reviews were fully documented.
“The registered manager agreed to take action to ensure any changes arising from these reviews were fully documented.” from the report
- 01Has a dedicated activities organiser been employed, and how often do activities now take place?
- 02How do you make sure activities reflect each person's interests, abilities and preferences?
- 03What have you changed to reduce delays when people use their call bells?
- 04How are changes from care plan reviews recorded and checked?
- 05How are families involved in annual care review meetings?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, using observations, conversations and checks of care records, medicines, staff records and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 September 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Abbeygate Rest Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 November 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.