You are here

Ash Court Care Centre - Camden Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

About the service

Ash Court Care Centre – Camden is a care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 62 people aged 65 and over. The accommodation is on three floors, with communal areas located on each floor and a patio garden on the ground floor. There were 60 people living in the home at the time of our visit.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were not always protected from harm. Medicines were not managed safely. People had not always received their medicines, and safeguarding concerns associated with the lack of medicines were not identified by the service. Aspects of infection control and cleanliness of the environment needed to improve.

Care staff had not always received sufficient training on specific health conditions and clinical tasks. The service’s decoration and adaptation did not support the needs of people with dementia and orientation difficulties. Some outside areas of the service were not maintained to ensure they were pleasant and safe for those who used it.

Aspects of the management and leadership of the service needed to improve. There were gaps in the managerial oversight of the service provision. Some managerial and staff roles and expectations, and accountability related to these roles, were not always clear. Not all regulatory requirements had been met. This had impacted the safety and the quality of the service provided.

Some aspects of formal care planning needed to improve. This was to ensure that people’s voice was reflected and information about people’s history and end of life wishes were included in their care plans and personalised.

Risks related to people’s health and care needs had been assessed and reviewed. Regular checks of care equipment and fire safety had been carried out. Staff were recruited safely, and systems were in place to make sure there were enough staff on duty each shift to meet people’s needs.

Staff received induction and training that the provider considered mandatory. Staff received supervisions and yearly appraisal. They felt supported by nurses and managers.

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.

People’s health and care needs had been assessed before they moved in to the service. Staff knew people’s needs well and people were happy with the care received. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. Food provided met people’s dietary needs and cultural and personal preferences. Staff supported people to have access to external health professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met.

There was a welcoming and positive culture in the service. Staff and managers received consistently positive feedback from people, their relatives and external professionals. They thought staff were welcoming, kind and very considerate. People felt safe and comfortable with staff who supported them. Staff interactions with people were caring and attentive to their needs. People were encouraged to make decision about their everyday care and their dignity was protected. Equality and diversity amongst people living at the service had been considered. People were supported to maintain relationships with those who were important to them.

Relatives felt the management team were approachable and always willing to help. People and relatives were encouraged to provide feedback about the service they received. Staff enjoyed positive team work. Staff said they were well informed about people’s current needs and changes and developments within the service. The service worked in partnership with others to ensure people received care they wanted and needed.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was good (10 Mar

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 6 November 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.