Archived: Avondown House

Updated 16 March 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience made telephone calls to people. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We gave the service two days’ notice of the inspection visit because the registered manager was often out of the office. We needed to ensure the registered manager was available to support the inspection.

Inspection site visit activity started on 31 January and ended on the 2 February 2018. We visited Avondown house on the first day and on the second day we visited Hawthorne court and Avondown house.

We spoke with the registered manager, three shift leaders, and seven care staff. We visited four people in their own homes, two were in at the time of the visit. We also made telephone calls to nine people of whom we were able to gain views from six.

We looked at five people’s care and support records and four staff files. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service such as incident and accident records, meeting minutes, recruitment and training records, policies and procedures, audits and complaints.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the PIR and other information we had about the service including statutory notifications. Notifications are information about specific events that the service is legally required to send us.

Updated 16 March 2018

We undertook an inspection of Avondown House on the 31 January and the 2 February 2018. The inspection was announced, which meant that the provider knew we would be visiting. This is because we wanted to ensure that the provider, or someone who could act on their behalf, would be available to support the inspection. The service registered to provide a regulated activity with the Care Quality Commission in October 2011.

At the last inspection the service was rated as Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Audits were undertaken although some changes to the management structure meant that shift leaders were now responsible for the auditing of care plans and medicines administration. Audits undertaken had identified shortfalls and actions although we found some shortfalls during the inspection.

The service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

At the time of the inspection there were five extra care buildings. These were Avondown House, Hawthorne Court, St Johns Court, Greenacres Court and The Orchard. During this inspection we visited Avondown House and Hawthorne Court.

We raised with the registered manager that the other sheltered housing schemes where the provider supported people with care could be a location and require registering with us. This matter is being dealt with separately from this inspection.

A registered manager was in post at the time of our inspection. 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 they were not always familiar with the staff who visited them however people received their calls when required.

People were supported by staff who had checks undertaken prior to starting their employment.

People felt safe and were supported by staff who were able to identify abuse and knew who to go to should they have concerns. Risk assessments identified any concerns and any actions to reduce the risk.

Staff had access to personal protective equipment and wore an ID badge and uniform.

People were supported by staff who had received training to ensure they were competent in their role. Additional training was identified and provided as and when required.

People’s care plans confirmed if people had capacity in different areas of their care.

Staff received supervision and an appraisal. People were supported by staff with their nutrition and hydration although people had mixed views on what was available to them.

People felt supported by staff who were nice and kind staff demonstrated a good understanding of equality and diversity and how to promote people’s independence.

People felt respected and confirmed they felt they had choice in their care although some people expressed a different choice in the gender of their carer this was not always respected.

People felt able to complain, no formal complaints had been received. Positive compliments had been received from family and staff who had left the service.

People and staff felt the management were supportive and accessible and felt able to raise concerns with them.