Avila House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care. Care plans, in some instances, lacked guidance for staff.

People were involved in reviewing their care plans if they wished, and discussed these with their keyworkers. One person said they did not do this because they felt their needs had not changed. Care plans provided comprehensive information about people, but 1 person’s plan relating to positive behaviour support lacked guidance for staff. The plan did not include an overview of the person’s behaviour, triggers, escalation, crisis management, and de-escalation. This resulted in the person often feeling frustrated and upset; they told us that communicating with some staff could be quite difficult as they lacked empathy.

A positive behaviour support plan should be a pro-active, person-centred document that provides strategies to understand why challenging behaviours occur and improve the quality of life for people. Strategies are not only reactive, but also proactive, and should focus on the person’s personal goals and needs, fostering independence and wellbeing by promoting positive changes.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People had access to a range of healthcare professionals and received co-ordinated care and support. The registered manager explained that people had a package of care which was commissioned by the local authority. They told us, “We work with the person, when, what and how they want that care. This information feeds into an electronic care plan and we cascade this to all the staff. We have a group email in house and email for professionals too, as well as families.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s care plans were provided in formats that met people’s individual needs and preferences. Care plans were kept by people in their flats for easy access. Staff could look at care plans on the provider’s laptops. A staff member said, “Sometimes communicating with 1 person can be difficult, they just need attention and patience. If they say something I don’t understand, they will repeat it for you.” The provider had a policy on how to make information accessible for people and the types of communication support available.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People’s feedback was gained through questionnaires. The provider’s leaflet on how to raise a complaint was written in easy-read format. Complaints were logged by the provider, but no complaints had been logged on behalf of people who received personal care. The registered manager told us, “We do questionnaires. We’ve done 1 so far, but there wasn’t a huge response. We look at any suggestions, if they would like meetings. We don’t have a communal area so any meetings would have to be held in the communal garden, then we’re bound by the weather really.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care and support they needed when they needed it.

People’s care and support was accessible, and calls were arranged in line with people’s preferences. Personal care was delivered in line with best practice and people had access to a range of healthcare professionals such as GPs, dentists, and occupational therapists.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcome and tailored their care and support in response to this.

Staff completed equality and diversity training. One staff member said, “Equality and diversity means adding value for people’s differences, respecting them, and recognising people have individual differences, maybe culturally, their social background, and what they believe in. Treating everyone fairly as it should be.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

We asked people about their future plans. One person said they would like to go on holiday and intended to speak with staff about this. If people wanted to discuss their wishes for their end of life care, this would be supported by staff. However, no-one had indicated they were ready to do this. The registered manager told us, “If needed, the keyworker or social worker could complete this. Some people might want to discuss their end of life plans, but it’s not been relevant here at the moment.”