You are here

Archived: Castleton Avenue Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 11 August 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 11 August 2016 and was announced.

Castleton Avenue provides supported living services for people with Autism and challenging behaviours. The service has three supported living schemes; Burdon Lane, Hollyfied Avenue and 61 Castleton. Each of the three services supports 5 adults.

At this inspection we visited, Burdon Lane and 61 Castleton Avenue to observe care.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People receiving care were safe. Their risks had been assessed and well managed. There were procedures in place for monitoring and managing risks to people. When there were changes in the level of risk, the risk management strategies changed to reflect this. There were appropriate procedures in place to help ensure people were protected from all forms of abuse. Staff had received training on how to identify abuse and understood procedures for safeguarding people.

People received their medicines in a safe manner and staff recorded and completed Medicine Administration Record (MAR) charts correctly.

People were protected from the risks associated with the recruitment of new staff. The service followed safe recruitment practices. People were safe because staffing levels were assessed and monitored to ensure they were sufficient to meet people's identified needs at all times.

Throughout this inspection we saw good examples of person-centred care, which were informed by current knowledge and understanding of autism. The care needs of people had been fully assessed and documented before they started receiving care. Staff were supported to carry out assessments to identify people's support needs and care plans were developed outlining how these needs were to be met. We observed that people received good personalised care and support.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed and people were supported to have a balanced and nutritious diet. People’s dietary needs were responded to appropriately with support from health care professionals were required. We saw plans from speech and language therapists for people who were at risk from choking.

People were supported to maintain good health. They had access to a wide range of appropriate healthcare services that monitored their health and provided people with appropriate support, treatment and specialist advice when needed. People were supported and encouraged to choose what they wanted to eat and drink.

Staff understood how to support people with dignity. People were dressed appropriately and looked well care for. Staff spoke with people in a respectful way, giving people time to understand and respond. Where people requested personal care, staff responded discreetly and sensitively.

All staff had attended training on the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 within the last 12 months. Staff were knowledgeable and aware of their obligations with respect to people's choices and consent. Staff told us that people and their families were involved in discussions about their care. Records showed clear decision-making processes, mental capacity assessments and best interests meetings.

Care plans for people using the service were effective, individual and autism specific in capturing the required information. People’s individual care needs were recorded in a timely manner which demonstrated that their needs had been met. There was a strong focus on supporting people in becoming more independent by working together with the family, the person and the day service to achieve the best possible outcome.

Complaints were managed well and responded to in a timely manner.

There was an effective quality assurance system in place. The registered manager and staff team were proactive in seeking out ways to improve.