95 Ashley Avenue

Updated 6 September 2019

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 30 August 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small care home. The registered manager may have been supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information about the service the provider had sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the service including previous inspection reports. We also looked at notifications about important events that had taken place in the service, which the provider is required to tell us by law. We also reviewed information that had been given to us by whistle blowers. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

People were unable to verbally tell us about their experiences, so we observed care and support in communal areas and staff interactions with people. We spoke with four staff, which included support workers, the deputy manager, the registered manager and a director. We also telephoned one relative to gain their feedback about the service.

We requested information by email from local authority care managers and commissioners who were health and social care professionals involved in the service.

We looked at the provider’s records. These included one person’s care records, which included care plans, health records, risk assessments, daily care records and medicines records. We looked at three staff files, a range of audits, satisfaction surveys, staff rotas and training records, and policies and procedures.

The service had been registered with us since 6 October 2016, although registered the service remained dormant for over 12 months following registration. This was the first inspection carried out on the service to check that it was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

Updated 6 September 2019

This inspection took place on 30 August 2018 and was our first inspection of this service. The inspection was announced.

95 Ashley Avenue 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.

95 Ashley Avenue is registered to accommodate up to five people in a two-storey house, although the service had been set up to accommodate two people at the present time. At the time of our inspection one person was living at the service. People were not able to communicate their feedback and experiences verbally of living at the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the ‘Registering the Right Support’ and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service had 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 were safeguarded from situations in which they may experience abuse including financial mistreatment. People had been helped to avoid preventable accidents while their freedom was respected. Medicines were managed safely and background checks had been completed before new care staff had been appointed. Suitable arrangements were in place to prevent and control infection. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and analysed by managers to reduce the chance of recurrence.

Care was delivered in a way that promoted positive outcomes for people and staff had the knowledge and skills they needed to provide support in line with legislation and guidance. This included respecting people’s citizenship rights under the Equality Act 2010. People were supported to eat and drink enough to have a balanced diet to promote their good health. Suitable steps had been taken to ensure that people received coordinated care when they used or moved between different services. People had been supported to access any healthcare services they needed. The accommodation was designed, adapted and decorated to meet people’s needs and expectations.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. In addition, the registered persons had taken the necessary steps to ensure that people only received lawful care that was the least restrictive possible.

People were treated with kindness and they had been given emotional support when needed. They had also been helped to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care as far as possible. This included them having access to lay advocates if necessary. The service had not supported anyone at the end of their life. Confidential information was kept private.

People received person-centred care that promoted their independence. This included them having access to information that was presented to them in an accessible way. People were given opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests. The registered manager and care staff recognised the importance of promoting equality and diversity. Suitable arrangements were in place to resolve complaints in order to improve the quality of care.

The registered manager had promoted a person-centred culture in the service and had made the arrangements necessary to ensure that regulatory requirements were met. People who lived in the service and members of staff were actively engaged in developing the service. There were systems and procedures to enable the service to learn, improve and assure its sustainability. The registered persons were actively working in partnership with other agencies to support the development of joined-up care.