Avida Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they began to receive a service. Some people had the opportunity to visit the service before they moved in. Other people were placed at the service at short notice, because of concerns for their safety. In all instances, staff worked with other health and social care professionals to find out about people’s needs and to determine if they could care for people safely. Where staff could not provide the care people wanted, they were honest about this.

People’s assessments considered people’s health and communication needs and care preferences. Assessments were reviewed as staff found out more about people’s needs and preferences. This helped to ensure people received care that met their expectations.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink so they would remain well. Where staff had any concerns people may need additional nutritional support, this was referred to their GP.

Staff understood some people may need extra help when eating so they could do this safely. For some people, staff followed their care plans to ensure people had the correct texture of food. Staff gently reminded some people to slow down when they were eating, to help people to reduce the risk of choking.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Relatives were kept informed about their family members changing needs and were confident staff supported people to access care from other health and social care professionals when this was needed. Relatives told us they were always told about the outcomes of external appointments.

Staff were positive about the flow of information across their teams and told us this helped them to give safe, consistent care to people. Health and social care professionals described open communication with them which helped to ensure people received good care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to enjoy the best health possible. People told us when they had any concerns about their health, staff helped them to see their GPs and other health and social care professionals. Relatives told us staff offered people the nutrition they needed to stay well. One relative told us “[Person’s name] has healthy meals. [Staff] ask them every day what they want to eat, they show them options.”

Health and social care professionals told us staff followed the advice they provided if people were unwell, so they would recover as soon as possible.

Staff encouraged people to be as active as possible and to spend time in the community doing things they enjoyed, so their well-being increased.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People were supported to monitor key aspects of their health. For example, staff prompted and assisted some people to check their blood sugar readings and supported them to manage their diabetes. Some people benefited from monitoring of their bowel function. This helped to ensure staff promptly escalated any concerns to people’s GPs, so people would receive good health outcomes.

Relatives and health and social care professionals were complimentary about the outcomes people had achieved since starting to receive care from the service. These included in relation to improvements in people’s physical health, reduction in their periods of anxiety and enhanced well-being.

Staff gave examples of support they had given to help people identify exercise they enjoyed. Staff participated in the exercise too. This had led to increased circulation, mobility, well-being and independence for 1 person. Other people had experienced improved well-being and were now less anxious, because staff had identified possible underlying health conditions and escalated to their GPs.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff knew the importance of gaining people’s consent before carrying out any activity or task. We saw staff asked people’s permission before providing care to them. People were supported to make as many choices as possible and to have control over their lives.

Staff had received training in The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff worked in the least restrictive way and acted in people’s best interests. They applied the principles of MCA, which provides a legal framework for decisions made on behalf of people who may lack capacity.

Where people were not able to make decisions themselves, best interest decisions were taken in conjunction with family members and other health and social care professionals. These included decisions in relation to the support people required to manage small amounts of money. We found 1 instance where a best interest decision had been taken where appropriate records had not been completed. This decision had focused on what was the correct action for the person, and their family members had been consulted as part of the process. The registered manager gave us their assurance the supporting documentation would be completed without delay.

Staff knew some people had others who had the legal right to make some decisions on their behalf. This was respected by staff.