Archived: Avenues East

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

All people that were employed by the service were given a name badge and had induction training before starting work to ensure they had the skills to meet people's needs. New staff were personally introduced to the person who used the service by a permanent member of staff prior to the new staff member providing their care and support. This meant that the appropriate actions were taken to ensure that the people who used the service were protected from others who did not have the right to access their home.

Recorded computerised records operated by the home care manager showed us how many hours support people required and which staff were rostered to provide the support. This system also ensured that for people that required two staff members to support them, this was arranged. This meant there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to meet people's needs. One person told us. 'I do feel safe because, I know my carers and I have a key safe, so the staff can let themselves in when they need to do so.'

Is the service effective?

Care plans were audited to ensure they accurately reflected people's needs. We saw that needs assessment had been completed with each person detailing their needs and support to be provided. Spot checks were carried out by the supervisor to check upon the quality of care and support their staff were providing. This included checking staff members arrived on time to support people and they had recorded information appropriately and followed the care plan.

People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. The records were reviewed monthly and updated appropriately which meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.

Is the service caring?

We saw that the staff interacted with people in a respectful and professional manner. One person told us: 'The staff are great, I cannot fault them.' Another person stated to us. 'I think they do very well, traffic is busy, but they always get here on or around time, I never have to worry that they will not turn up.' The homecare manager informed us that the service and or staff member would contact the person who used the service if they were ever running late, to inform the person. This was out of respect but also because the person who used the service would worry for the well-being of the staff.

Is the service responsive?

People's care records showed that where concerns about their wellbeing had been identified the staff had taken appropriate action to ensure that people were provided with the support they needed. This included increasing the support as arranged with the local authority and working with other health care professionals, including doctors and district nurses. We examined the records of seven people who used the service and noted that their risk assessments had been reviewed and updated at reviews and in response to events. This ensured people received safe and appropriate care.

Is the service well-led?

The service had an out of hours on-call system in operation throughout the 24 hour period to support staff and people who used the service should the need arise. The registered manager explained to us the assessment process which was used to determine if the service could meet the support needs of the person. This was because the service did not want to let anyone down by agreeing a contract to provide a service which it was not able to fulfil. The registered manager was knowledgeable and had undertaken training with regard to the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. They had also worked with the training department to ensure that all staff were trained in this area.

We visited three supported living services where the care and support was provided by Avenues East staff. We spoke with two people who used these services, but were unable to speak with the other people directly due to their complex needs; however we used a number of different methods, including looking at their records and observing the support provided by staff, to understand their experience of the service.

We saw that people who used the service were well cared for by responsive and well led staff. We found that people received care and support according to their assessed needs. Where people did not have capacity to consent to their care, we found the provider was not always acting in accordance with the legal requirements of Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People told us that they felt safe and relaxed with staff. We found that there was enough skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. Staff told us that they had received appropriate training and spoke knowledgably about the people they provided care and support to. Systems in place to monitor, manage and identify missed calls were not sufficient and placed the health, safety and welfare of people, whose calls were missed, at risk.

At one location, people were not able to share their experience with us so we sat with them and observed staff interacting with them as they had their evening meal. We saw that staff treated people with respect and asked consent before providing support. We saw that people were able to choose which activity they preferred to engage in and were supported to be as independent as possible.

We found that the service was meeting people's needs and promoting their health and wellbeing. People were supported to engage in activities they enjoyed and to access the community. Staff told us that they encouraged people to feel fulfilled by trying new hobbies and foods. Staff had received comprehensive training and understood how to meet people's needs.