We carried out a review of the data available to us about Avelo Care on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Avelo Care, you can give feedback on this service.
Avelo Care is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. The service provides support to older and younger people with dementia and people with physical or sensory disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 49 people using the service.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. 16 people were in receipt of personal care at the time of our inspection.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and relatives told us staff were extremely kind, compassionate and they were treated with respect. The provider supported people in a way which considered their wider holistic needs which had a significant impact on their mental wellbeing. Additional support was offered to people which surpassed their agreed packages of care. People were put at the centre of the service and the provider and staff demonstrated a highly empathetic approach which was sensitive and compassionate. People were supported in a way which allowed them to take as much control over their lives as possible. Their choices and views on the care they received was listened and responded to in an individual way. Promoting people’s independence was a fundamental part of the service’s culture and values. The provider understood the importance of supporting the wellbeing of staff which created a positive culture where staff felt well supported and listened to. A positive approach to equality and diversity was well embedded in the service.
People were protected from harm and the risks of abuse. The provider recorded accidents and incidents and analysed them to identify patterns and trends. Staff were recruited safely, and people received support from staff who understood their needs. The provider had good oversight over staff calls and the support people received. Risk assessments were implemented, and action taken to reduce the risk of harm to people and staff. Medicines were managed safely; people or their relatives managed their own medicines and other people were supported by staff. There were effective infection, prevention and control measures to keep people and staff safe.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were assessed before their package of care began or when their needs changed. Staff told us they felt well supported and received training and supervisions to carry out their roles effectively. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet where this was required. The provider worked with other professionals such as the local authority and district nurses so people could receive packages of care to meet there needs.
People had care plans which provided staff with information to support people appropriately in line with their needs and wishes. Although staff understood the needs of people well, parts of the care plans needed further development. The provider took action to update the care plans during the inspection. Peoples communication needs were considered and there was information on how to effectively communicate with the individual in their care plans. People and relatives knew how to complain, and the provider had a policy for responding to complaints. Staff received training in end of life care, the provider supported people and relatives to consider this sensitive subject.
People, relatives, professionals and staff were extremely positive and complimentary about the culture and leadership of the service. Staff, the registered manager and provider understood their responsibilities. The provider had good oversight of the service and regular audits were completed to review the care and support people received. People, relatives, professionals and staff were asked for their views on how the service could improve. Staff and management were focused on continuous learning so the care people received could improve.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 28 December 2016).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Avelo Care on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Right at home East Kent provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. There were 53 people being supported by the service at the time of our inspection.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
The service demonstrated they were very 'customer focused' and had systems and processes in place to monitor and improve the service to achieve a consistently high standard of care and support for everyone who used the service. There was a call monitoring system and spot checks to help ensure visits were provided at the agreed times.
People told us they received care and support that met their individual needs. People were involved in the development, planning and review of their care.
Staff knew people well and treated them with dignity and respect. Care plans were personalised and contained detailed information about people’s support needs and risk assessments were detailed and specific providing staff with all relevant information to ensure risks were both identified and mitigated where possible. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to any allegations of abuse. Medicines were managed safely.
People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff and these were recruited through a robust process which helped ensure staff were suited for the roles they performed. Staff were inducted and received on-going training and support. Staff had individual supervisions, team meetings and regular contact with office staff to share good practice and discuss any concerns.
People were supported to make their own decisions, and to retain where possible everyday living skills and abilities and their choices were respected. Their views were obtained through a variety of communication feedback methods and people’s views were taken into account.