You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 October 2018

This inspection took place on the 27 and 28 September 2018 and was unannounced.

Astbury Mere Care Home was previously inspected in June 2017. During the inspection we found a breach of Regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in respect of staffing. The registered person had failed to ensure that staff received appropriate support and training necessary to enable them to carry out the duties they were required to perform.

At this inspection we found that the registered provider had taken action to address the breach identified at the last inspection.

Astbury Mere is a ‘care home’ run by Porthaven Care Homes LLP. 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.

The care home provides accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 62 older people on two levels, each of which have separate adapted facilities. The ground floor accommodates up to 31 people with residential and nursing care needs. The upstairs floor accommodates up to 31 people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, the care home was accommodating 57 people.

The care home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The registered manager was present throughout the two days of our inspection and was supported by their regional manager and deputy manager. The management team engaged positively in the inspection process and were helpful, transparent and keen to share and receive information regarding the operation of the care home. They also demonstrated passion and enthusiasm to ensure the continuous improvement of the service.

Astbury Mere Care Home presented as a warm and comfortable environment in which to live. We observed that staff were attentive to the needs of people living in the care home and that they engaged with people in a positive, respectful and dignified manner.

Since our last inspection, the registered provider had introduced a new electronic system to manage, store and record information on people’s assessed needs and the support they required and received from staff. This included care plans, observation records and progress notes. This was work in progress at the time of our inspection.

People were offered a choice of nutritious and wholesome meals that were provided in dining areas that offered a pleasant environment for people to socialise and eat their meals.

A comprehensive programme of group and individualised activities was in place which included both on and off-site activities. People using the service were seen to participate in meaningful activities and had access to a range of resources which enhanced their experience and wellbeing.

People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and staff liaised with people’s GPs and other healthcare professionals as necessary to maintain people’s health or support them at the end of life. Policies and procedures had also been developed to ensure staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities for ordering, storing and administering medication.

Systems had been established to ensure that staff working in the care home had been appropriately recruited and to safeguard people from abuse or harm. A complaints policy and procedure was also in place and people’s views, concerns and complaints were listened to and acted upon.

Staff had completed induction, mandatory and service specific training to help them understand their roles and responsibilities. Since our last inspection, systems and processes for staff training and d

Inspection areas



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was safe.

The premises were safe and provided a well maintained, comfortable and pleasant environment.

Safeguarding systems and processes were in place to help protect people from abuse and improper treatment.

Staffing levels were adequate to ensure people received appropriate levels of care and support.

Recruitment procedures provided appropriate safeguards for people using the service. This helped to reduce the risk of unsuitable people being employed to work with vulnerable people.

Systems had been established to protect people from the risks associated with unsafe medicines management.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was effective.

Staff learning and development, systems and processes had been developed to ensure staff were appropriately trained and supported for their roles and responsibilities.

Managers and staff acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that people received the right level of support with their decision making.

People had access to a choice of nutritious meals and systems were in place to liaise with GPs and other health and social care professionals when necessary.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was caring.

Staff engaged with people in a warm, friendly and caring manner and understood the principles of good care practice. People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy and human rights were safeguarded.

People�s personal information was stored securely to maintain confidentiality.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans and supporting documentation were in place that were subject to ongoing development and review to ensure people�s needs were identified and acted upon.

People were encouraged to engage in a range of group and person-centred activities and were supported to follow their preferred routines.

There was a complaints procedure in place and any complaints were responded to appropriately.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was well led.

The care home had a registered manager in place to provide leadership and direction.

Governance and quality assurance systems had been developed to ensure oversight and scrutiny of the service. This included processes to enable people who lived in the care home and their relatives to be consulted about their opinions of the service.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies and health and social professionals.