Archived: Chelwood Avenue

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found '

Is the service safe?

People had been cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment at the home had been well maintained and serviced regularly. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people living at the home. People had received the support they needed from staff to meet their care and welfare needs.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

A relative told us that they had been happy with the care and support the person had received at Chelwood Avenue. Discussions with staff and our observations showed that staff knew people well and were able to respond to their different communication methods. We observed staff had a good understanding of how people made every day choices for themselves and how they communicated. The appropriate people knew how to provide support to people who lacked capacity to make a particular decision. This helps to ensure any decisions made for the person are considered carefully to ensure they are in the person's best interests.

People had received the support they needed to monitor their health and to seek support from health professionals if needed. They had also received support to live the lifestyle of their choice and spend their time as they chose.

Several of the staff at the home were long standing and therefore provided continuity of care for people. We found that long standing staff had a good understanding of people's choices, support needs and communication methods. However we also found that some staff had not received training in working with people who had autism. Staff training records were incomplete it was therefore not possible to fully establish if staff had received up to date training in how to support people safely and well.

Is the service caring?

People were receiving the support they needed with their care and welfare needs. We also found that people were receiving support to lead a lifestyle of their choosing and to maintain contact with people who were important to them.

Long standing staff had a good knowledge of people's choices and support needs and were able to communicate well with them. We observed that staff spent time with people socially as well as responding to their care and welfare needs. We also observed that people living at the home responded positively to staff and chose to spend time with them.

Is the service responsive?

People had received support to maintain relationships with people important to them. Staff had a good understanding of people's preferred routines and this had been recorded in their care plan. We observed that staff took time to check people wanted to follow their usual routines and communicated with people in a way they could understand.

Is the service well-led?

Health and safety checks had been carried out regularly at the home to ensure the environment and equipment were safe to use. We found that other systems for checking the quality of care provided at the home were not as effective as they should be. A lack of auditing and quality assurance meant that issues noted during our inspection had not been acted upon. This included care records that had not been reviewed and updated for some time and incomplete staff training records. We also found that no overall assessment of staff skills and training needs had been carried out.

We found that staff had all the information they needed to provide people who used the service with the care and support they needed.

People received the right help and support with eating and drinking and they had been offered regular meals and drinks. However there were no records to show people had received a balanced and nutritious diet appropriate to their needs and preferences.

People's medication was safely stored safely and it was administered to them on time by staff who had received appropriate training.

People were supported by sufficient staff that were appropriately skilled, experienced and qualified and knew people well. Some staff expressed they were feeling tired due to the excessive hours they had worked.

We found that there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service that people received.