You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

We inspected Anvil Close on 20 and 26 March 2018, the first day of the inspection was announced, the provider knew we would be returning for the second day.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Requires Improvement.

At this inspection, the service was rated Good.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions Safe, Effective and Responsive to at least good. At the last inspection, there was a breach of legal requirements in relation to person-centred care.

At this inspection, the provider had made improvements to meet the relevant requirements.

Anvil Close is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Anvil Close is a residential service providing care for up to 12 adults with a range of learning difficulties. There are two flats on the ground floor and two flats on the top floor each with three bedrooms. People with more complex needs live in the ground floor flats. There were nine people using the service at the time of the inspection. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

At the last inspection, we found that care plans were not always up to date and therefore did not accurately reflect people's individual needs. Accurate records were not always kept in relation to medicine administration records and stock levels of medicines. Staff did not always receive regular supervision to support them in their role. At this inspection, we found there had been improvements in all of these areas.

People were supported to take part in activities in the community and maintain their interest in hobbies. The majority of people went to day centres during the week. The people that were at the service at the time of the inspection looked happy and content. They were supported appropriately by staff.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Relatives of people using the service told us their family members were safe and they had no concerns about their wellbeing. They told us they were kept informed about any changes to the care and support their family members received and were able to visit them at any time. People and their relatives were given information about how to raise concerns and they told us they were confident their concerns would be heard and responded to.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management team and were happy with the training and supervision they received. There were robust recruitment procedures in place and new employees received an induction which included an introduction to the values of the service. Records showed that care workers received regular training in a number of relevant topics and regular supervision.

Up to date and accurate records were maintained. These included records of when people had been supported with their medicines, risk assessments and care plans. Care plans were person-centred and included guidance on the most effective ways to communicate

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

The service has improved to Good.

People received their medicines as prescribed and accurate medicines records were maintained.

There were robust recruitment procedures in place and there were sufficient staff employed.

Staff were trained and understood their role and responsibilities for maintaining standards of cleanliness and hygiene in the premises.

When people behaved in a way that challenged others, staff managed the situation in a positive way that protected people’s dignity and rights.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

The service has improved to Good.

Staff received regular training and supervision which helped them to carry out their roles effectively.

The service took cultural and religious needs into account when planning meals and drinks, and encouraged people to make healthy food choices where this was required.

People were supported to access healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support.

Where people were not able to consent to their care plans, they were developed and agreed in their best interest in consultation with staff and family members and other stakeholders.

People’s individual needs were met by the adaptation, design and decoration of premises.

Caring

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

The service has improved to Good.

People’s care records identified their needs, choices and preferences and how these were met and were regularly reviewed.

The service enabled people to carry out person-centred activities and encouraged them to maintain hobbies and interests.

People were given information about how to raise concerns and complaints and this was done in an accessible way.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 May 2018

The service remains Good.