You are here

Archived: Avalon Enterprise (UK) Limited Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The inspection took place on 26 October 2016 and was announced.

Avalon Enterprises Ltd UK provides domiciliary care and support services to people with a learning disability living in their own homes. The service is based in an office in the basement of one of the homes, but has a separate entrance. The office is open during office hours and an on call system is in place outside of these times. The service currently provides support to 12 people with personal care, they also support another 35 people with independent living skills, in Thanet, Ashford, Canterbury and Faversham. Some people have their own flats and others share a house.

The service has a registered manager in place and they have been in this role since 2012.

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.

There were two locality managers who supported the registered manager at different locations; they were supported by staff known as ‘senior lifestyle mentors’ and ‘lifestyle mentors’.

People were safe and were supported to try new things and take risks. They were able to plan their own support and chose their staff. People knew about safeguarding and who to talk to if they were worried. They could contact the registered manager or director directly and did so.

Staff were recruited safely and people were involved in the interview process. Staff had an induction and were introduced to people by established staff before supporting them. Staff were offered training to meet the needs of people they supported. Staff were in regular contact with the management team and had regular one to one meetings. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they told us they felt supported.

Medicines were managed safely and people were encouraged to be as involved as possible with their medicines. Staff worked closely with local health and social care professionals to manage people’s health and develop new opportunities for them. When people’s needs changed advice was sought and followed to make sure the service could still meet people’s needs safely.

People had good relationships with staff who supported them. Staff knew people well and treated them with dignity and respect. People were encouraged to express their opinions and be involved in planning their care.

The care plans reflected people’s preferences and how they liked to be supported. People’s hobbies and interests were supported and many did voluntary work which the staff had supported them to find. People had support to eat healthily and planned their own menus.

When complaints were received they were investigated and responded to. People’s confidentiality was respected and records were stored securely. Staff had some understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), the registered manager said this was an area for further training. The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty

Safeguards (DoLS). For people who live in their own homes this is managed by the Court of Protection (COP). No applications had been made for people as no one needed one.

There was an open and person centred culture, people and staff could contact or visit the office whenever they wanted to. The registered manager visited people regularly to check they were happy with the service and was accessible to people, professionals and staff. Views were sought from people, relatives and professionals and were acted on.

The CQC had been informed of any important events that occurred at the service, in line with current legislation.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The service was safe.

Staff understood how to keep people safe from abuse. There was enough staff to meet people’s needs; they were recruited safely and with the involvement of people.

Risks to people were recognised, assessed and managed safely. People were supported to understand and manage their own risks where appropriate.

People received their medicines safely, by suitably trained staff and were supported to take an active role in managing their medicines.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff that knew them well and had suitable skills and training to meet their needs. Staff had an induction and felt well supported.

People were supported to make choices and decisions about their care. Not all staff had a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).

People were supported to plan their meals and to cook them.

People were supported to maintain good health physically and mentally. Staff supported people to access health services when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The service was caring.

Staff supported people in a kind, caring way. People were supported to get to know new staff.

Most people were supported to be independent and to make decisions about their own care. People were supported to build and maintain relationships.

People told us staff listened to them and treated them with dignity and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The service was responsive.

People were supported when and how they wanted to be. Staff knew people well.

When people’s needs changed their care plans were updated to reflect this.

People were encouraged to take part in hobbies they liked and to try new things. People were encouraged to be part of their community and to feel valued.

If people had a complaint they knew who to talk to, complaints were dealt with and responded to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 December 2016

The service was well-led.

There was an open and person centred culture. Staff understood the values of the service and told us they felt valued and listened to.

People could contact the registered manager or director at any time.

Audits were carried out on the quality of the service and actions taken as needed. People’s opinions were sought and listened to.