CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Aveley House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, accessed testing, managed admissions and had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not rated or assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and how the home protected people during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 30 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control in response to COVID-19 outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found clear arrangements for visitors, including health screening, temperature checks, hand hygiene and personal protective equipment. They were also assured that the home was managing PPE, testing, admissions, cleaning, social distancing and possible outbreaks safely.
The home had increased cleaning of frequently touched surfaces. People were supported to enjoy activities, and staff used different ways to explain changes to daily life during the pandemic.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives no overall quality rating and is not a full assessment of all aspects of care.
Visitor safety
The home had a visitor pod and checks intended to reduce the risk of infection entering or spreading through visits.
“Temperature checks, health screening questions, hand hygiene and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) were in place.” from the report
PPE and cleaning
There was a good supply of PPE, staff had been trained to use it, and cleaning of frequently touched surfaces had increased.
“All staff had received training in the correct use of PPE, and how to put it on and take it off safely.” from the report
Activities and communication
People continued to take part in activities they enjoyed, and staff explained changes to daily life during the pandemic in different ways.
“People were supported to take part in activities that they enjoyed with staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How were the visitor plans for each person completed, and how are they kept up to date?
- 02How do you currently check visitors for symptoms and manage hand hygiene and PPE?
- 03How do you access testing for people living here and staff?
- 04How do you keep high-touch surfaces clean and respond if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05How do you make sure each person can continue activities they enjoy and understand changes to their daily life?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only, so the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess all areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 April 2021 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.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Aveley House was rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with an end of life policy still being developed.
The inspection took place on 18 September 2019. One inspector reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicine records, staff recruitment and training records, audits, complaints and rotas. They also spoke with staff, relatives and a health professional, and observed people and staff together.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities and could support up to seven. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity and encouraged to make choices, build skills and be independent. Medicines, staffing, infection control and links with health professionals were handled well.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspection found consistently good care and management at that time. The rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in January 2017.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw people being treated kindly and with respect. Relatives described the home as having a family atmosphere.
“We observed people being treated with respect and kindness by staff and other people living at the service.” from the report
Choice and independence
People helped with household tasks, meal planning and shopping. Support was arranged around their interests, abilities and wish to develop skills.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff on duty, recruitment checks were completed and medicine records checked by inspectors matched the stock they reviewed.
“There was sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people living at the service.” from the report
Communication support
Staff used speech, gestures, pictures and sign language to support people's communication. Care plans recorded individual communication needs.
“Verbal, gestures and pictures were used as forms of communication.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health and social care professionals and made referrals when needed. Inspectors found this support was timely.
“The service worked closely with health and social care professionals including the GP, community nurse, learning disability nurse specialist, social workers and psychiatrists.” from the report
End of life arrangements
needs fixingThere was no end of life policy when inspectors visited. Management was reviewing one and planned links with the local end of life team and related staff training.
“Although there was no end of life policy in place, the deputy manager had been reviewing this.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the end of life policy and staff training mentioned in the report?
- 02How would support be arranged if my relative needed end of life care?
- 03How are restrictive interventions used, and how do you make sure they are only used as a last resort?
- 04How would staff support my relative's particular communication needs, including the use of pictures, gestures or sign language?
- 05How would you cover staff sickness while keeping familiar staff and keyworker support for my relative?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall quality of the care home, its premises and the care provided examined. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 November 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 Aveley House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 2011.
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.