- Care home
Ashton Cross
Assessment report published 29 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Ashton Cross is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 15 people. At the time of our visit, 10 people were living at the service.
The service provides specialist rehabilitation and support for people living with an acquired brain injury, across the Beeches and Woodland Units. The assessment was prompted due to an aged rating. The Beeches supports up to 6 people and offers a ‘home for life’ environment supporting people to be as independent as possible. The Woodlands supports up to 7 people who have completed their rehabilitation but require on-going support. There is a bungalow used to promote independent living.
We carried out this assessment on 29 September and 6 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People were supported by enough staff who had been safely recruited and had the skills and knowledge to support them safely.
People told us they felt safe living at Ashton Cross. We observed staff carrying out their duties diligently to ensure the home was clean, tidy, and comfortable. Staff demonstrated a proactive approach to risk management and spoke positively about the team's communication. One member of staff said, “The team works well together and we make sure any concerns are raised quickly so people remain safe and well supported.”
We found people received person-centred support that respected their dignity, privacy, and human rights. Staff were warm, respectful and attentive, taking care to communicate with people in ways that reflected their personal preferences and promoted positive engagement.
Staff were confident any safeguarding concerns would be responded to appropriately and investigated by the registered manager and provider. They understood how to escalate concerns externally and were able to identify relevant agencies, including the police and local authority safeguarding team, if action was not taken internally.
People's care plans and risk assessments were well developed and contained detailed information about their needs, strengths, preferences, and risks. This enabled staff to provide personalised support and respond consistently to people's individual requirements.
Care and support were effective and focused on achieving positive rehabilitation outcomes. Staff used their specialist knowledge of acquired brain injury to provide personalised support, while multidisciplinary working ensured care plans remained current and goal focused. People were actively involved in their recovery, and communication with families and professionals was well managed.
The multidisciplinary team worked collaboratively with people to develop and deliver personalised activity programmes that reflected their individual needs, interests, and rehabilitation goals. Activities were thoughtfully tailored to each person's abilities and stage of recovery, ensuring they remained meaningful, engaging, and aligned with identified outcomes. This rehabilitation-focused approach supported people to maximise their independence, build confidence, develop new skills, and make progress towards their personal aspirations and long-term recovery objectives.
Medicines were managed safely, with appropriate arrangements for ordering, storage, temperature monitoring, and disposal. Records showed people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff administered medicines safely and took the time to check whether people required ‘as required’ (PRN) medicines. PRN medicines are ‘as required’, for example paracetamol for pain relief. Staff respected people's choices and preferences regarding the way they preferred to take their medication.
Staff reported high levels of job satisfaction and said they felt valued by the organisation. They described receiving consistent support from the management team, enabling them to perform their roles confidently and effectively. Comments from staff reflected a positive culture, with one member of staff stating, “I feel listened to, clients are listened to and everything is client-led as it should be,” while others told us, “The manager is very approachable and is available at all times” and “I feel really well supported by the whole team.”
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the provider was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions, and they had choice, control and freedom over their lives. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen.
Governance systems were well established and provided effective oversight of the service. Audits and monitoring activities were used proactively to maintain standards, promote safety, and support continuous service development. Leaders were receptive to feedback and took action to further enhance quality assurance processes. The provider continued to demonstrate the characteristics of a good-rated provider, with strong leadership, knowledgeable staff, and a clear commitment to delivering person-centred, high-quality care.
People's experience of this service
We gathered evidence by speaking with people, speaking with relatives, gaining feedback from staff, reviewing care records and observing care and support. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We observed staff who understood people’s individual ways of communicating and this enabled people to be listened to and supported in ways that met their specific and individual needs.
Relatives spoke positively about communication within the service and told us they were kept updated about important events and changes affecting their family members. They said staff maintained regular contact and ensured they were involved in care reviews and decision-making processes, helping to promote a person-centred approach to care and support.
People told us the staff knew them well and they liked them. Comments from people included, “I’ve got the best primary coach (named staff member),” “All the staff are great” and “Staff are a good laugh.”
People described going away on holiday with staff and told us they were included in the decision about who supported them. They told us how much they had been able to achieve on a recent activity holiday. They described being able to participate in every activity and thoroughly enjoying themselves. One person explained they attend a holiday club where all people supported put forward ideas for holidays they would like to plan in the future.
One person proudly showed us a project they had been working on and had completed as part of their therapeutic goals. They showed us the next project they had chosen which was more detailed and complex. They felt confident they would be able to achieve this.
Another person was being supported to undertake an activity they were very passionate about and extremely skilled. They had sold many of their creations and had been commissioned for specific items. This person told us they loved this activity and happily spent many enjoyable hours creating works of art.
People experienced positive, caring, and person-centred support from staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs, preferences, and communication styles. People appeared relaxed, comfortable, and confident in their surroundings. They engaged positively with staff and sought support, guidance, and reassurance when required.
We observed warm, respectful, and meaningful interactions throughout the service. Staff communicated with people in a way that promoted dignity, choice, and independence, while demonstrating a genuine understanding of how individuals preferred to be supported. Humour, laughter, and friendly conversation were evident throughout the day, contributing to a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere people clearly enjoyed.
People were supported with eating and drinking in a dignified and respectful manner. Staff encouraged individuals to maintain and develop their independence wherever possible, ensuring support was tailored to their abilities and personal preferences. The positive relationships between people and staff helped create a homely environment where people appeared happy, settled, and valued.