Archived: Southside Partnership - Ambleside Avenue

Southside Partnership – Ambleside Avenue is a residential care home that can provide personal care and support to up to six people with learning disabilities or autism. At the time of our inspection six people were using the service. Most people currently using the service also had physical disabilities.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service

People we spoke with told us they were happy living at Ambleside Avenue and with the care and support they received there. A quote we received from one person the service supported summed up how people felt about the care home, ”I’m happy living here and I’m glad I moved in…The staff are lovely and look after me like my own family.”

People nearing the end of their life received compassionate and supportive care from staff, although they had not received any formal end of life care training. We recommended the provider finds out more about end of life care training for staff, based on current best practice.

The service was safe. There were systems and processes to protect people from the risk of abuse. People were cared for by staff who knew how to prevent or manage risk in a person-centred way. This kept people safe, while not restricting their freedom. There were sufficient numbers of staff whose suitability to work with people with learning disabilities had been thoroughly checked. People received their medicines as they were prescribed. There were regular checks to make sure the environment was safe. The care home was kept clean and staff followed relevant national guidelines regarding the infection control and basic food hygiene.

People benefited from being cared for and supported by staff who were well-trained and supported. 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. Staff understood people’s health needs and promoted good outcomes and quality of life for people. People continued to be supported to stay healthy and well and have access to the relevant community health care professionals. The home environment was set up in an innovative way that promoted people’s independence and reflected their individual needs and preferences.

People received care and support from staff who were kind, empathetic and respectful. Staff took the time to get to know people well and understand their preferences and wishes. People were treated equally and had their human rights and diversity respected, including their spiritual and cultural needs and wishes. Staff used different methods to support people to express their views and make choices about their care, depending on how people communicated and what worked best for them. People were encouraged and supported to develop their independent living skills.

People received person-centred care that focused on what was most important to them and took into account their diverse needs and wishes. People were involved in reviewing care plans regularly to keep them up to date. Managers and staff understood the Accessible Information Standard and ensured people were given information in a way they could easily understand. People had opportunities to take part in a variety of in-house and community based social activities that were meaningful to them and tailored to their interests and abilities. Staff supported people to maintain relationships that were important to them. The provider dealt with people’s complaints in a thorough, prompt and fair way.

People benefited from being supported in a service that was well-led and managed. The service had an open, inclusive and person-centred culture. There was a robust governance system with good oversight from the provider to make sure the service continued to provide a high standard of care and support to people. The provider consulted people, their relatives, community health care professionals and staff as part of their ongoing programme of assessing the quality of the service and making improvements. When things did go wrong, there were systems to learn lessons from this and prevent similar incidents from reoccurring. The provider worked holistically in close partnership with other health and social care professionals and specialists to plan and deliver positive outcomes for people.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at the last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 15 May 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

At the last inspection in December 2014, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection, we found the service remained Good and demonstrated they continued to meet our regulations.

People were safe as staff knew how to identify abuse and understood the procedures to follow if they had concerns about people’s well-being and safety. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and equality and diversity to develop their knowledge on how to keep people safe. Staff identified risks to people and plans were put in place to mitigate against potential harm.

There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to support people meet their needs. People’s care was provided by staff who were trained and skilled to carry out their roles. Staff were supported in their role and received training and supervisions to ensure they provided care that was effective. Appropriate recruitment checks ensured that staff were suitable to provide people’s care.

Medicines were managed safely and stored securely. People received the support they required to take their medicines safely from staff trained and assessed as competent to do so.

People had their rights upheld as required under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People consented to care and treatment and where they were unable to do so, best interests procedures were followed.

People received enough to eat and drink and they enjoyed the food provided at the service. People’s nutritional and dietary needs were met. Staff made appropriate referrals to healthcare professionals to ensure people were supported to maintain their wellbeing and to have their health needs met.

People’s care was delivered in a kind, caring and dignified manner. Staff treated people with respect and upheld their dignity and privacy. People were supported to do as much as possible for themselves. Staff understood the importance of giving people choice about their care and respected their decisions. People’s care was provided in the least restrictive way possible. People were supported to access advocacy services to have their views heard on matters that were important to them.

People, their relatives and healthcare professionals were involved in the planning and review of their care. Staff reviewed regularly people’s needs and updated their care plans to reflect changes in their health and the support they required. People received support that was appropriate to their needs. People took part in activities of their choosing which they enjoyed and were supported to follow their interests.

People had access to information about how to make a complaint or raise a concern. Staff supported people to make their views about the service known and their feedback was valued.

The culture at the service was open, transparent and promoted a person centred approach when providing individual care. Staff and healthcare professionals had positive comments about how the service was run. Staff were supported in their role and felt valued at the service.

The quality of the service and safety of people was monitored regularly and improvements made when necessary.

We observed how people with risks associated with eating and drinking had their safety promoted. Staff felt more confident in their roles, they had received role related training and followed recommendations made by health professionals to support people with remaining safe.

Staff had extensive input from health and social care professionals and were supported by management in their personal and professional development. Practices were monitored closely to ensure they followed recommendations made by health professionals.

People were treated with warmth and respect by staff. We observed that staff supported people needing assistance to transfer safely and ensured their modesty and dignity was promoted.

People were supported to follow activities in the community and at home. There was consideration of people's cultural and religious needs.

We found that improvements had been made in response to concerns raised about people's care although there remained some aspects where there was further work to adequately meet the standards required. For example one person's weight was monitored with insufficient regularity and so changes could not be responded to quickly.

Important events affecting people's welfare had not been reported to the Care Quality Commission although the provider was required to do so. .

Some records were inadequately maintained and this meant that effective monitoring of people's needs could not be carried out.