Archived: Aylesford Intermediate Care Centre

The summary below describes what people who used the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

We found people were treated with dignity and respect by staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place and staff understood how to protect the people they cared for.

The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). No applications had been submitted by the provider. Relevant staff had been trained in the MCA and DoLS and understood when an application should be made and how to submit one.

We found people's needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans. These assessments and plans included any risks to the person and how these could be managed to keep the person safe. The provider employed sufficient staff to meet people's needs.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. We were told by staff members we spoke with that they were able to contact a manager when they needed to.

Is the service effective?

The service provided a reablement service for up to six weeks. This involved care, support and treatment for people who had usually, but not always, recently left hospital and were assessed as needing additional assistance before returning to their home. People who used the service, relatives and staff we spoke with were clear regarding the aims of the service.

People we spoke with told us their needs were met. A person told us, 'They have helped me get ready to go home." We saw people being cared for and supported in accordance with their plans. It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff they understood people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.

Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people living at the home. Care staff we spoke with told us they had received the training they needed to provide care and support to people.

We saw in care plans that risk assessments had been completed that promoted people's independence. We saw in care plans that where people undertook aspects of their care independently this was clearly stated. One person who used the service told us, 'I need to be independent so I can go home and live my life."

Is the service caring?

People told us staff were kind and met their needs. A person who used the service said, "The staff are lovely." Another person we spoke with told us, "Anything I want or can't do myself, I ask and staff help."

We saw staff talking with people in a kind, considerate and respectful manner. We saw staff took care to ensure people had enough to eat and drink.

Care staff we spoke with told us they felt people were well cared for. Relatives we spoke with told us they were happy with the care their relative received.

Is the service responsive?

We found that each person's needs were regularly reviewed and care plans were updated if needed. Records showed that people were supported in line with their plans.

People told us their needs and wishes were met. We found that each person had a clear plan in place to meet their individual needs.

We found the provider had made changes to improve the service as a result of investigations into complaints and accidents.

Is the service well-led?

We found the provider had systems in place to seek the views of people and that these were acted on. People who used the service told us they would feel able to raise any concerns they had with the provider and were confident their concerns would be dealt with.

The provider carried out quality checks and we found that the health and safety of people who used the service, staff and others was monitored.

We were told by people who used the service, relatives and care staff that they found staff to be approachable and that they listened to their views.

We spoke with nine people using the service, the manager, deputy manager and most of the staff on duty. We spent time in the communal areas observing people's experience and how staff interacted with them. We attended the weekly multi-disciplinary meeting. This is where the team of professionals involved in people's re- enablement review people's progress. We looked in detail at the care support provided to two people who used the service.

We found that people had given their consent to the support and treatment to be provided. Records we viewed demonstrated an individual programme of enablement was in place for each person.

We asked people what it was like to stay at the Aylesford. People told us, 'It's very good', and 'Everything is going well. I am able to try things out and get back on my feet.'

Staff had a good understanding of the needs of people and treated people with respect. We found staff had the skills and knowledge to support people who used the Aylesford. The recruitment procedure ensured staff were safe to work with people using the service.

We found the Aylesford clean and procedures were in place for minimising infections.

All the records we requested to see were available. Documents we viewed were accurate and up to date.