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 with people, including those with limited verbal communication. There was evidence that internal and external professionals were involved in people’s care which meant people’s needs were met appropriately. These included positive behaviour support analysts and community health professionals.
People’s needs in relation to the premises were met. The service was undergoing a programme of refurbishment at the time of the inspection.
The registered manager was aware of her responsibilities in relation to regulatory requirements and appropriate notifications were submitted to the CQC.
A number of audits were completed including those in relation to health and safety, infection control, medicines and finances. An improvement plan which was reviewed on a regular basis by the registered manager and area manager was in place to monitor progress against the issues found.
The service was transparent and worked with relevant external stakeholders and agencies.