You are here

Avondale Residential Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

This unannounced inspection took place on 13 February 2017.

The home is registered to provide accommodation, nursing or personal care to a maximum of 15 people. On the day of our inspection 15 people were using the service. People who live there have needs associated with old age.

The first ratings inspection of the service took place on 24 February 2016 and at that inspection we found the service to require improvement in the areas of Safe and Well Led. Previously we found that systems in place to ensure safe and consistent administration of prescribed medicines were not comprehensive and lacked effective audit. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made to ensure the safe management of medicines. Recruitment practices needed to be more robust in order to protect the people using the service, we found that the correct checks were now in place. During the last inspection we saw that there had been no action taken to address any less than positive feedback received from people; we found that feedback was now displayed in the home and was addressed within ‘residents meetings’. The provider’s quality assurance systems were not comprehensive and lacked an effective analysis of their findings, we found that this still required improvement.

The service had a registered manager. 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. The registered manager was available on the day of the inspection.

Quality assurance audits were not carried out robustly, so that it was unclear if any patterns or trends were developing which may impact upon the service provided to people. We did not always receive notifications of accidents or incidents that had occurred, which the provider is required to do so by law. People were happy with the service they received and felt the service was led in an appropriate way. Staff were supported in their roles. Staff felt that their views or opinions were listened to.

People living in the home felt safe. Staff were aware of the processes they should follow to minimise risk to people. Systems were in place to protect people from the risk of harm and abuse. Staffing levels and skill mix ensured that people’s needs would be met. Staff had been trained to manage medicines safely and people received their medicines as and when they should.

Staff had the skills and knowledge required to support people effectively. Staff received an induction prior to them working for the service and they felt prepared to do their job. Staff could access on-going training and regular supervision to assist them in their role. Staff knew how to support people in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and gained their consent before assisting or supporting them. Staff assisted people to access food and drink and encouraged people to eat healthily.

Where possible people were involved in making their own decisions about their care and their own specific needs. Staff provided dignified care and showed respect to people. People were encouraged to retain their independence with staff there ready to support them if they needed help.

Staff understood people’s needs and provided specific care. People’s preferences had been noted and acted upon where possible. People were given the opportunity to become involved in activities. People knew how to raise complaints or concerns and felt that they would be listened to and the appropriate action would be taken.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was safe.

People felt safe and staff had been trained to recognise and report abuse or harm.

Medicines were administered, recorded and stored appropriately.

Staff recruitment was carried out safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were provided with an induction before working for the service, on-going supervision and support.

Staff knew how to support people in line with the Mental Capacity Act and gained their consent before assisting or supporting them.

Staff assisted people to access food and drink.

Caring

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was caring.

People felt that staff were kind and caring towards them.

People were given choices and encouraged to make decisions where possible.

Staff maintained people’s dignity and provided respectful care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was responsive.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs.

Staff considered people’s preferences when carrying out care.

People knew how to raise complaints or concerns and felt that they would be listened to and the appropriate action would be taken.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was not always well-led.

There was not a robust system of quality assurance audits carried out.

The provider did not ensure they notified us about incidents/accidents they are required to.

People were happy with the service they received and felt the service was well led.