Grove House

Updated 22 November 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 comprehensive inspection took place on 15 and 18 October 2018 and was announced. It was carried out by one adult social care inspector. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as we needed to make sure we were able to access records and gain permission from people’s relatives to speak to them.

Before the inspection, the provider 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. We looked at the information in the PIR and also looked at other information we held about the service before the inspection visit. We also looked at notifications sent in by the service. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law. We contacted Healthwatch and local commissioners to seek their views on the service provided. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care services. No concerns were raised. We used this information to help plan the inspection.

Due to people’s needs and to avoid causing them unnecessary distress, we did not meet with

them during our inspection. However, we met with one relative and spoke with four relatives on the

telephone. We met with the registered manager, co-ordinator and six care staff.

We looked at a sample of records relating to the running of the agency and the care of individuals. These included the care records of two people who used the agency. We also looked at records relating to the management and administration of people’s medicines, health and safety and quality assurance. We checked two staff recruitment files and staff training and supervision records.

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.