CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Abbotts Barton
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Most risks were assessed and reviewed, and staff were trained to recognise abuse. However, checks for people who self-administered medicines were not consistently completed, and some people reported long waits for help.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training, supervision and development support. People’s choices, mental capacity, eating and drinking needs, and access to healthcare were supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, patient and caring. Inspectors saw respectful communication and support for privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were based on assessments and reviewed monthly, with people and families involved. Activities were available in the home, individually and in the community, and complaints were investigated under the home’s procedure.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff described management as approachable and communication as good. Audits and other quality checks identified issues and led to improvements.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Abbotts Barton is rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but medicines checks and response times needed attention.
The inspection took place over 11 and 12 July 2017. It began without warning and continued with notice. The inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care files, medicines records, staff records, complaints, audits and the building.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were generally supported by trained staff who understood their needs. Inspectors found kind and respectful care, good support with food and healthcare, regular care reviews, activities and effective management systems.
There were some safety concerns. Risk assessments and reviews were not always completed for people who managed their own medicines. Fridge temperature records were also incomplete. Some people and relatives said they sometimes waited too long for help, although records showed call-bell response times had improved.
Kind and respectful care
People and families spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw relaxed, friendly and unhurried care that respected people’s wishes and dignity.
“People received kind, compassionate care by staff who had a good knowledge of them as individuals.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had an induction, ongoing training, supervision and development opportunities. Training covered general care skills and needs specific to people living in the home.
“Staff received an induction, on-going training and the support and professional development to carry out their roles effectively.” from the report
Personalised care and activities
Care plans included people’s needs, life history and preferences. Activities included group events, one-to-one support and trips into the community.
“The plans contained clear information about people's assessed needs and the actions staff needed to take to support people.” from the report
Management and improvement
Staff understood their responsibilities and described an open, positive team culture. Audits were used to identify problems and make changes.
“Quality assurance processes were effective in leading to improved outcomes for people.” from the report
Self-administered medicines
seriousSome people who managed their own medicines did not have complete or up-to-date risk assessments. This placed them at increased risk of harm. The home began reviewing these arrangements during the inspection.
“People who were administering their own medicines were placed at an increased risk of harm because risk assessments and reviews were not being completed consistently.” from the report
Medicine fridge records
needs fixingTemperature checks for medicine fridges were not completed every day. This meant medicines might not have been stored safely.
“The fridge temperature needed to be recorded each day to ensure it was within safe parameters.” from the report
Waiting for help
needs fixingSome people and relatives said they sometimes waited too long for care or for call bells to be answered. The home had taken action and recorded an improvement in response times, but waits still occurred.
“I've timed it; you can wait 10-15 minutes. Five minutes should be enough” from the report
- 01How do you now assess and regularly review whether each person can safely self-administer medicines?
- 02How do you make sure GP confirmation is recorded when someone self-administers medicines?
- 03How often are medicine fridge temperatures checked now, and what happens if a check is missed or a temperature is unsafe?
- 04What are the usual call-bell response times in the mornings and overnight?
- 05How will you involve me in my relative’s monthly care reviews and in choosing activities that suit their interests?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; it began unannounced on 11 July 2017 and continued as an announced visit on 12 July 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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 Abbotts Barton
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 2012.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.