You are here

Archived: Mayfair Avenue Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 10 May 2016

This inspection took place on 22 March 2016 and was unannounced. There were three people using the service at the time of this inspection. At our last inspection in May 2014 the provider met the regulations we inspected.

The home had a registered manager in post. 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.

Two people told us they liked living at Mayfair Avenue and said staff were kind and caring towards them. There was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere when we visited.

There were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow these. Staffing numbers were sufficient to help make sure people were kept safe.

People received care and support from a long standing group of staff who knew them very well and understood their needs and preferences. Each person had individualised support plans to make sure they received the support they required.

People were supported to have their health needs met. We saw that people’s prescribed medicines were being stored securely and managed safely.

The registered manager supported staff to deliver appropriate care and support. Staff attended regular training which gave them the knowledge and skills to support people effectively. Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The systems in place to monitor the quality of the service could be improved. There was no evidence of regular visits or audits by the provider organisation to ensure proper oversight of the service and drive improvement where required.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 10 May 2016

The service was safe. People received the support they required to keep them safe. Identified risks to people�s safety and welfare were being managed appropriately.

There were enough staff to meet people�s needs.

Medicines were managed safely.

Recruitment processes were robust and appropriate pre-employment checks had been completed to help ensure people�s safety.

Effective

Good

Updated 10 May 2016

The service was effective. Staff were up to date with their training requirements and had the knowledge and skills to meet people�s needs.

The service complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Staff supported people to access healthcare services to help make sure their physical and mental health needs were met.

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and hydration.

Caring

Good

Updated 10 May 2016

The service was caring. People were treated with kindness and their dignity was respected.

Relationships between staff and people using the service were positive. Staff knew people very well and provided care and support in line with their wishes and preferences.

Responsive

Good

Updated 10 May 2016

This service was responsive. Staff were knowledgeable about people�s care and support needs.

People were supported to take part in activities and to maintain contact with family and friends.

Arrangements were in place for dealing with complaints and responding to people�s comments and feedback.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 10 May 2016

Some aspects of the service were not well led.

There was an experienced registered manager in post who was visible and approachable. Staff felt supported in their role and said they did not have any concerns about the service.

The systems in place for quality assurance required improvement to ensure proper oversight of the service from the provider organisation and drive improvement where required.