You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

This inspection took place on 15 and 18 October 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice as we needed to be sure somebody would be available in the office. The first day of the inspection was spent at the agency’s office and on the second day we spoke with people’s relatives on the telephone.

Avenues East is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to people who are living with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, older people, younger adults and people who have a physical disability and/or sensory impairment. Not everyone using the agency receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.

At the time of this inspection six people were receiving assistance with their personal care needs.

This was the agency’s first inspection since it registered with the Care Quality Commission in September 2017.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People felt safe. People were protected from the risk of harm or abuse because the provider had effective systems in place which were understood and followed by staff. People were supported with their medicines by staff who were trained and competent in their role. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs in a safe and unhurried way. The provider ensured staff were suitable to work with people. Staff knew the procedures to follow should they did not get a response when visiting a person’s home. The procedures for identifying and managing risks helped to ensure people were safe. There were procedures to protect people from the risks associated with the spread of infection.

People received effective care. People were supported by staff who were trained and competent in their roles. People’s health care needs were monitored. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who took time to get to know people and what was important to them. Staff treated people with respect and respected their right to privacy. People were supported to achieve their goals and reach their full potential.

People were involved in planning and reviewing the care they received which helped to ensure people received a service which met their needs and preferences. People’s religious and cultural needs were considered by staff. Information was available in accessible formats where required. People knew how to complain if they were unhappy with the support they received.

The registered manager was committed to ensuring people received a high standard of care. The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. People were supported by a team of staff who felt supported and valued. People’s views were valued. The registered manager worked closely with other professionals to ensure the best outcomes for people who used the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was safe.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably experienced and trained staff to meet people’s needs.

There were effective on-call arrangements for people who used the service and the staff team.

Risk assessments were carried out to make sure people received their care safely and could maintain their independence.

There were robust staff recruitment procedures which helped to reduce the risk of abuse.

People were protected from the risks associated with the control and spread of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was effective.

People received care from a staff team who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.

The agency made sure they could meet a person’s needs and preferences before a service was offered.

People were always asked for their consent before care was given.

Staff liaised with other professionals to make sure people’s healthcare needs were met.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring.

People were treated with respect and their right to privacy was maintained.

People were supported by a team of staff who they were able to build trusting relationships with.

People were supported to maintain their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was responsive.

People received care and support which was personal to them and took account of their preferences.

Care plans had been regularly reviewed to ensure they reflected people’s current needs.

People felt comfortable to make a complaint and felt any concerns raised

would be dealt with.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was well-led.

People benefitted from a staff team who were well supported and happy in their role.

The registered manager and staff team were committed to providing people with a high-quality service.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.