• Care Home
  • Care home

Ashlodge

Overall: Good

83-85 Cantelupe Road, Bexhill On Sea, East Sussex, TN40 1PP (01424) 217070

Provided and run by:
Mr & Mrs B & K Vijayakumar

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 31 March 2022

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 25 February 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 31 March 2022

Ashlodge is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Ashlodge is a detached property close to the seafront in Bexhill -on-Sea. It provides care and support for up to 16 older people with care needs associated with older age. This includes people with low physical and health needs and people with mild dementia and memory loss. Ashlodge provides respite care that includes supporting people while family members are on a break, or to provide additional support to cover an illness.

At the time of this inspection 13 people were living in the service. This inspection took place on 14 June 2018 and was unannounced.

There is a registered manager at the home who is also one of the partners and a registered provider that owns the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We inspected Ashlodge in February 2016 and found the provider was in breach of three regulations. At the last inspection improvements had been made but the provider remained in breach of two regulations. This was because the provider had not identified, assessed and responded to all risks in the service, or ensured all health and safety legislation had been adhered to. The management systems that included quality monitoring had not always ensured safe and best practice was followed or required improvements were responded to. Following this inspection, the provider wrote to the CQC with an action plan on how these regulations were to be met.

At this inspection we found these regulations had been met and the service was rated ‘Good’ overall.

However, we found the management arrangements did not ensure effective leadership in all areas. Some records had not been completed in a consistent way and although there was no evidence that this impacted on care, evidence of appropriate care and support was not always clearly recorded. This included records relating to DoLS and best interest decisions. This was identified to the registered manager as an area for improvement.

Staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They understood the principles of gaining consent and the registered manager had a good working knowledge of the MCA and involved health care professionals to support them when people did not have capacity to make decisions. They recognised when people may be deprived of their liberty and followed correct procedures to protect people's rights.

People were looked after by staff who knew and understood their individual needs well. Staff treated people with kindness, they were polite and considerate in their contact with people. They demonstrated genuine care for each person. People's dignity was protected and staff were respectful. We received positive feedback about the care and the atmosphere in the service. People liked the ‘homely’ feel of the service and told us they felt ‘safe’. They liked living in a small home where everyone knew each other. Visiting professionals told us staff were kind and responded to people’s health and welfare needs fully and appropriately.

Medicines were stored and handled safely. People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and knew what they should do if they believed people were at risk of abuse. Staff received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They understood the principles of gaining consent and the registered manager had a good working knowledge of the MCA and involved health care professionals to support them when people did not have capacity to make decisions. They recognised when people may be deprived of their liberty and followed correct procedures to protect people's rights.

Staff completed a full induction and training programme which supported them to meet the needs of people. Staffing arrangements ensured staff worked in such numbers, with the appropriate skills that people's needs could be met in a timely and safe way. Staff felt well supported and could raise any issue with the registered manager. There was an open culture at the home and this was promoted by the pleasant staff and visible registered manager. Staff enjoyed working at the home and felt supported.

People had the opportunity to take part in a variety of activities in the service. This took account of people's preferences and choice. Visitors told us they were warmly welcomed and people were supported to maintain their own friendships and relationships. Staff related to people as individuals and took an interest in what was important to them.

People were given information on how to make a complaint and said they were comfortable to raise a concern or give feedback. A complaints procedure and comment cards were readily available for people to use.

People were very complementary about the food and the choices available. People needed minimal support with eating and staff were positive in their approach to promoting people's independence. People's nutritional needs were monitored and responded to ensuring people’s needs and preferences were taken in to account.

Feedback was regularly sought from people, relatives and staff. People were encouraged to share their views daily and satisfaction surveys had been completed. The registered manager was readily available led by example and responded to any feedback that she received in a positive way.