You are here

Archived: Ashton Lodge Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The inspection was carried out on 4 and 8 February 2016 and was unannounced.

The service provides accommodation and support for up to twelve older people. Accommodation is arranged over two floors. A passenger lift provides access between floors. Ten bedrooms are single occupancy and one bedroom is shared. There were ten people living in the service when we inspected.

A registered manager was in post and was present throughout the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the care and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care services. At the time of the inspection, the registered manager had applied for DoLS authorisations for some people living at the service, with the support and advice of the local authority DoLS team. The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Mental capacity assessments and decisions made in people’s best interest were recorded.

The registered manager provided leadership to the staff and had oversight of all areas of the service. Staff were motivated and felt supported by the registered manager and staff team. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and they were confident to raise any concerns they had with her.

People were treated with kindness and respect. People’s needs had been assessed to identify the care they required. Care and support was planned with people and reviewed to make sure people continued to have the support they needed. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. Detailed guidance was provided to staff about how to provide all areas of the care and support people needed.

People told us they felt safe. Staff had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and measures put in place to manage any hazards identified. The premises were maintained and checked to help ensure people’s safety.

Staff listened to what people told them and responded appropriately. People were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity was maintained. People told us that they had no complaints and if they did they would speak to the registered manager or staff.

There were enough staff on duty with the right skills to meet people’s needs. Staff had been trained to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support.

People received their medicines safely and when they needed them. Policies and procedures were in place for the safe administration of medicines and staff had been trained to administer medicines safely.

People had access to the food that they enjoyed and were able to access drinks with the support of staff if required. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed and recorded. People were asked for feedback on their food and action was taken if required.

People participated in activities of their choice within the service. There were enough staff to support people to participate in the activities they chose. A volunteer also spent two afternoons a week with people participating in various activities.

Processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was safe.

People felt safe and staff received appropriate training and support to protect people from potential abuse.

There was enough staff to provide people with the support they required.

Medicine management was safe. People received their medicines as prescribed by their GP.

Recruitment procedures were in place and followed recommended good practice.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was effective.

Staff followed the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to make decisions and staff offered people choices in all areas of their life.

People were provided with a suitable range of nutritious food and drink.

Staff were trained and supported to provide the care people needed.

Staff ensured people�s health needs were met. Referrals were made to health and social care professionals when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was caring.

People said the staff were kind and treated them with respect.

People�s privacy, dignity and independence was protected.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and staff took account of their individual needs and preferences.

Records were up to date and held securely.

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was responsive.

People�s needs were assessed, recorded and reviewed.

People were included in decisions about their care.

The complaints procedure was available and in an accessible format to people using the service.

People were supported to maintain relationships with people that mattered to them.

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was well-led.

There was an open and transparent culture, where people and staff could contribute ideas about the service.

Checks on the quality of the service were regularly completed. People and their relatives were asked for their experiences of the service.

The manager understood their role and responsibility to provide quality care and support to people.