Autumn Vale Rest Home

Updated 27 July 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.

This inspection took place on 28 June and 3 July 2018 and was unannounced. The first part of the inspection was carried out by two inspectors and the other part was conducted by one inspector.

Before the inspection we had reviewed the previous inspection reports and other information we had held about the service, including notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law.

The provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. At the inspection we checked if the information provided in the PIR was accurate.

During the inspection we spoke with four people who were using the service. We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager, a recovery worker and a support worker.

We pathway-tracked the care of five people. Pathway tracking is a process which enables us to look in detail at the care received by each person in the home. We reviewed medication records relating to people who used the service. We saw recruitment files and supervision records for four staff members. We looked at all staff training records and training records. We considered how information was gathered and quality assurance audits were used to drive improvements in the service. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service, such as health and safety files, risk assessments, resident meetings, staff meetings and staffing rotas.

Updated 27 July 2018

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 28 June and 3 July 2018.

Autumn Vale is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service is situated on the outskirts of Portsmouth, close to a bus route and local amenities. Autumn Vale can accommodate up to 25 people and there were 21 people living there at the time of our inspection.

We had conducted our previous unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 21 April 2016. Breaches of legal requirements had been found. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they were going to do to meet legal requirements relating to the safe management of medicines. They also explained what action they were planning to take to ensure they would be able to effectively assess the quality of the service.

Following the full comprehensive inspection, we undertook a focused inspection on 17 July 2017 to check whether the service had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met the legal requirements. We found the service had made significant improvements in the ‘safe’ and ‘well-led’ domains.

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 told us they felt safe at Autumn Vale Rest Home. Staff knew the correct procedures to follow if they considered someone was at risk of harm or abuse. They had received appropriate safeguarding training and there were policies and procedures in place to follow in case of an allegation of abuse.

People's safety was promoted as risks that may cause them harm in the service and in the local community had been identified and managed. Appropriate risk assessments were in place to keep people safe. Medicines were managed safely. All staff had received training in the safe management of medicines. The provider had systems in place to store medicines safely.

Procedures in relation to recruitment and retention of staff were robust and ensured only suitable people were employed at the service.

Staff working at the service were suitably qualified and skilled. Staffing numbers and shifts were managed to suit people's needs so that people received their care when they needed and wanted it. Staff had access to information, support and training they needed to provide people with satisfactory care. The provider’s training was designed to meet the needs of people using the service. As a result, staff had the knowledge they required to care for people effectively.

There were policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Staff were trained in the principles of the MCA and could describe how people were supported to make decisions. Where people did not have the capacity, decisions were made in their best interests.

People’s health and well-being were kept under review and staff liaised closely with health and social care professionals to ensure people received all the support they needed.

Care plans were informative and contained clear guidance for staff. They included information about people’s routines, personal histories, preferences and any situations which might cause people anxiety or stress. The plans clearly described how staff were supposed to support people in such circumstances.

People were provided with a range of activities which met their individual needs and interests. Staff also supported people to maintain relationships with their relatives and friends.

People knew how to raise concerns and make complaints. Complaints were recorded, investigated and the outcome was fed back to the complainant.

People using the service and staff were very complimentary about the registered manager of the service. People told us that the manager was accessible and approachable. A positive and open culture was promoted at the service. The provider had effective systems in place to review the quality of the service provided.