Avo Care Limited

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 service 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 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 service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People were at the centre of their own care, supported by staff to live well at home. Staff were attentive and met people’s needs. We reviewed one person’s care and support plan which was written using person centred language. A person said, “The staff know what support I need, and they get on and do it, but when I need help in other areas they are always happy to do this, they are always going above and beyond.” A staff member said, “Care plans and risk assessments clearly say what support client’s need.”

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People told us they had access to the care they needed to live well. People were confident in the staff to summon emergency medical advice if needed. The registered manager explained being able to recognise changes was one of the benefits of the way the service was arranged. The provider told us they routinely contacted professionals to support people such as, GP and community nurses.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Communication was effective within the service; we received positive feedback about the way the service communicated with people. The service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. The service adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People told us they felt involved in their care and support, either working with the service or their individual member of staff. Information was used to shape the service and make changes. The registered manager involved people using the service so they could get to know their needs. Feedback received during the inspection showed care was delivered to the persons preferences and needs. Staff and people had confidence the registered manager would deal with any problems. The complaints policy was aligned with best practice for handling concerns. The service carried out “lessons learnt” and analysis from compliments and complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.People received care and support, which was accessible and considered their individual needs. The provider had training in equality and diversity, and this was mandatory for staff members to complete. Policies and procedures underpinned all safe working practices, and this was supported by training and ongoing monitoring. Within each policy there was consideration of equity, accessibility and safety.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. People told us they were treated fairly, and their rights were respected. Staff had access to multiple channels to raise concerns about discriminatory treatment. Staff training, guidance and spot checks meant staff were consistently reminded of their responsibilities. Policies and procedures underpinned working practices within the service, and this was supported by training and ongoing monitoring.

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. People were provided with opportunities to discuss their wishes for the future. The service was committed to supporting people to continue spending their days at home in a familiar environment. At the time of our inspection the service was not providing care to people in their last days. We were assured the service had the systems in place to do so if required.