Avida Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they liked the staff who cared for them. A person said they looked forward to staff coming to provide their care and said, “[Staff] are very nice, they talk to me, they’re very kind. From my heart, they are like my family.”

Relatives were complimentary about the staff teams supporting their family members and said a consistent staff team had developed good bonds with their family members. A relative told us, “[Person’s name] has the same faces visiting her. [Person’s name] gets on well with them. To be honest, they have the same [staff] so she knows them all by name.”

Staff took time to listen to people and to find out what mattered to them. They used this knowledge when offering people choices, so people’s well-being increased. Staff understood people’s right to dignity and privacy and took steps to ensure people’s rights in these areas were promoted. For example, by knocking on people’s front doors and seeking their permission before they entered. A staff member explained, “You don’t break privacy, so you close doors, close curtains, make sure [people] are dressed properly.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People told us staff understood what was important to them. A relative said, “Yes, staff know [person’s name] well.”

Staff gave examples of people’s likes, dislikes and individual preferences, and how they tailored support accordingly. For example, some people preferred to be supported in their first language, while others valued help to practice their faith through culturally appropriate food. Staff took time to understand each person’s wishes and responded to them as individuals.

People and relatives described positive, respectful interactions with staff, based on people’s values. This helped to enhance people’s wellbeing and made them feel comfortable asking for the support they wanted.

The provider promoted people’s independence, ensuring they understood their rights and had choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing.

People told us staff recognised and respected their right to be independent, encouraging them to do as much as they wished for themselves. Relatives said staff balanced this well with supporting their family members to ask for more help when they wanted it.

People described choosing their own meals, snacks and drinks and care call times. Some people enjoyed preparing their own drinks and meals, while others preferred staff support. Similarly, some people chose to attend health appointments independently or with family, while others asked staff to accompany them.

Staff provided updates to people’s families and commissioners where people had requested this. Staff also understood people’s right to decline aspects of their care and took time to listen to what support people wanted.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us they could rely on staff to support them at the agreed times. A person described how vigilant staff were in checking their home for trip hazards at every visit, as their ability to tidy items away varied from day to day. Relatives said they were confident staff would be flexible if their family member wanted to change their call times. A relative told us, “They’re very flexible, if the time needed changing, I’m sure they would.”

Staff knew people well and could anticipate when someone might need additional support. A staff member described advocating with commissioners to increase a person’s care package, which helped ensure their needs were met and reduced their feelings of isolation.

People’s care plans contained clear guidance to help staff recognise early signs of anxiety or distress, along with strategies to prevent escalation.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

New staff had an induction and completed the training they needed to provide safe, person‑centred care. Staff told us they had regular supervisions and staff meetings. This gave staff time to raise any concerns, talk about their development, and discuss their health and wellbeing.

The provider had systems to help keep people and staff safe when out in the community. These included additional equipment and risk‑management processes designed to support staff wellbeing.