We undertook an announced inspection of Abbeyfield London Polish Society on 20 April 2017. Abbeyfield London Polish Society offers a supported living service and personal care for up to eight people. At the time of our inspection there were seven people living at the service who were all receiving the regulated activity of personal care. Each person living there had access to the communal facilities such as a lounge, dining room and a garden.
At the last inspection on 13 and 14 June 2016, we found the provider was not meeting the regulations relating to safe management of medication and good governance.
Following the inspection the provider sent us an action plan detailing how they would make improvements. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and that the provider had been working consistently towards meeting legal requirements fully.
There was a registered manager in post who had been managing the service for the past 28 years. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The service had made improvements in relation to medicines administration and medicines were administered, stored and disposed of in a safe way. Staff had followed the medicines administration process, which was regularly monitored and audited by the registered manager.
The service had procedures in place for the safeguarding of vulnerable people and these were being followed. All staff working at the service received safeguarding of vulnerable adults training.
People had risks to their health, safety and welfare assessed and recorded in their care plans. Staff knew the identified risks, therefore, they were able to support people in a safe way.
There was a process in place for the reporting of incidents and accidents and there was a clear audit trail of all accidents and incidents that took place at the service.
There were enough staff on each shift to be able to care for people and respond to their changing needs effectively and without delay.
The service had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure only suitable staff were employed at the service.
All staff working at the service had the experience and the knowledge of working with people who use the service. Additionally, to ensure that people had been cared for effectively, staff received regular external training and ongoing formal supervision and appraisal, and day-to-day support from the registered manager.
The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People's capacity had been assessed by the service. People had consented to their care and support where they were able to do so. Staff received MCA and Deprivation of Liberty (DoL) training and had good understanding of its principles.
People were supported to maintain a sufficient and nutritious diet and meals were provided in line with people’s nutritional requirements as well as their individual dietary preferences.
People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare services. The service had made suitable and prompt referrals to external health professionals to ensure people received appropriate medical assistance and they remained in good health.
People and all the family members we spoke with were very complementary about staff and they were happy with the care and support offered by the service. The interactions between people and staff were exceptionally kind, caring and compassionate and the atmosphere at the service was relaxed and homely.
Staff visited people who used the service in hospital to ensure the continuity of care and ongoing emotional support.
Staff was happy to go an extra mile to ensure people lived happy and comfortable life’s and all their needs had been met.
The service promoted inclusion and independence for all the people living there. People were encouraged to participate in various daily tasks related to running the service.
People told us staff respected their dignity and privacy and they felt comfortable when receiving personal care.
Family members and friends could visit at any time and staff welcomed their presence and participation in the life of the service.
People’s needs were assessed before their admission to the service. People and their relatives were welcomed to visit the service prior to their admission to understand how the service worked and what would be offered to them if they lived there.
Each person living at the service had an individual care plan that was person centred and consisted of information on people’s lives prior to living at the service as well as on their current care needs and preferences. All care plans were reviewed regularly and people and their relatives participated in the planning and reviewing of their care.
People using the service had ongoing access to meaningful and stimulating activities throughout the week. People could participate in a range of group exercises and activities and one to one re- enablement sessions.
The service had a complaints policy and procedure in place that was available in the communal area of the service and people and their relatives knew about this procedure.
The service had introduced a survey that was designed to collect feedback about the service they provided. The registered manager was in the process of gathering all surveys in order to analyse the feedback received and use the data to inform the service’s improvement plan.
The registered manager had made continuous improvements with regards to the leadership and governance of the service. They had implemented a new, computer based care planning and service management system to ensure the smooth running and monitoring of the service.
Staff knew what was expected of them and felt comfortable approaching the registered manager with any work queries and challenges.
People who used the service and their family members knew the manager well and they spoke fondly about their commitment to the service and people who used the service.
External professionals gave positive and complementary feedback about the care and support provided by the staff and the registered manager to people who lived there.