CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Avalon
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed, staffing levels were considered sufficient, and people received medicines when they should, although medicine returns were not always recorded.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's health and nutritional needs were supported, and staff had relevant training and inductions. Some mental capacity assessments were not specific to individual decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people's preferences and supported people to make choices and become more independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities and access to the community, but end of life plans were not in place.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Relatives and professionals spoke positively about the management. Audits, staff meetings and feedback systems were used to monitor the service and make improvements.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Avalon was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with improvements needed to some records.
This was the first inspection since the home registered in March 2018. It was unannounced and took place on 25 June 2019. One inspector spoke with staff, relatives and professionals, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, good support with medicines, positive relationships, personalised care and activities that helped people stay well and involved in the community.
There were some gaps in records and training. Mental capacity assessments were not always decision-specific, medicines returned to the pharmacy were not always recorded, and end of life care plans and training were not in place. The report made recommendations for these areas, but recorded no breaches.
Kind, respectful care
Staff knew people well and built meaningful relationships. Inspectors saw people being treated with kindness and supported with activities they had chosen.
“Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices, take positive risks and develop independence. They could help with meals, personalise their rooms and access the community.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
Good health support
People had access to health professionals, and advice was followed. Nutritional needs were recorded and monitored where needed.
“People were supported to maintain good health and had access to a range of health care professionals” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff adapted communication to people's needs. Information was available in formats such as easy read, pictures and large print.
“Throughout the inspection we saw how staff adapted the way they provided people with information to suit their needs” from the report
Active management
The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to check the service. Staff were encouraged to suggest improvements.
“There was a focus on continuous improvement.” from the report
Medicine return records
needs fixingStaff did not always record when medicines were returned to the pharmacy. Inspectors found stock levels were correct, but staff did not always know what medicines were being held.
“However, staff did not always record when medicines were returned to the pharmacy.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingOne capacity assessment covered personal care generally rather than a specific decision. The manager agreed to review all capacity assessments.
“One person's capacity assessment was in relation to personal care and was not decision specific.” from the report
End of life planning
needs fixingNo one was receiving end of life care during the inspection, but end of life care plans were not in place and staff had not received end of life training.
“Documents to record the arrangements, choice and wishes people may have for the end of their life were not in place” from the report
- 01Have all mental capacity assessments been reviewed so that each one relates to a specific decision?
- 02How do you now record medicines returned to the pharmacy, and how do you check the records are complete?
- 03Do all residents now have end of life care plans recording their choices and wishes?
- 04What end of life training is now available to staff?
- 05How are people supported to take positive risks and access activities in the local community?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC key questions; the inspector also reviewed two people's care records and multiple medicines records. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 July 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Avalon
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 March 2018.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Thurrock
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,210 a week. 86 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.