Ash Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities. People, staff and relatives all told us they felt supported by the registered manager and management team and there was an open and honest culture at the service.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Staff told us they felt supported by the leadership team. People and relatives told us the leadership team were kind and compassionate towards them. A relative told us, “[Name] is always treated with kindness and patience, staff seem to know [name] needs. They [staff] are good to her.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Although staff told us they were encouraged to speak up and were able to raise concerns with the management team, their feedback was not always acted upon especially the need for more staff. Staff told us they knew how to access information about whistleblowing and speaking up if required. A staff member told us, “I can speak up about anything and I know management will listen, [Name] is good like that.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. Staff told us they were able to ask for reasonable adjustments to be made to their working patterns for specific needs, for example, to incorporate family commitments. A staff member told us, “[Name] has been very supportive with me coming back to work, I am doing a different role to ease me back to work and that has helped me and feel supported.”

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability in place. However, they did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes. We found people’s care plans were not always up to date and some areas needed improvement in relation to environmental safety and infection prevention and control and medicines. However, in response to our feedback during the inspection, the provider acted on this promptly and made improvements.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. People at the service benefited from the partnerships the provider had built with local health services such as G.P, district nurses, pharmacists, physiotherapy and mental health teams. A healthcare professional told us, “They [management] are very good at seeking support, if there is an issue, they will contact us immediately. Communication with management is really good.”

Staff and leaders had a good understanding of how to make improvement happen. Leaders encouraged staff to speak up with ideas for improvement. Processes to ensure that learning happens when things go wrong, and from examples of good practice were in place however they needed to be established and embedded as part of good practice. For example, weekly medicine management audits found that pain patches were not always applied to different spots as needed, and this was not clearly recorded, and behavioural support plans didn’t always include enough personal details to help people during distress or agitation. However, the provider regularly worked with other healthcare professionals, holding a monthly meeting with pharmacists, GPs, and community matrons to get support and stay up to date with best practices and new ideas.