Ashton Court Residential Home

Updated 4 December 2020

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 care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 11 November 2020 and was unannounced.

Updated 4 December 2020

We inspected the service on 6 and 7 September 2017. Ashton Court is registered to provide care and support for up to 39 people, including people living with a disability and/or a dementia related illness. The service is set out over two floors and there is a lift to enable people to access the second floor. On the day of our inspection 24 people were using the service.

At our last inspection in April 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’ overall with some improvements required with effective relating to people’s hydration and nutritional needs. At this inspection we found that the service remained ‘Good’ and the required improvements for effective had been made.

People continued to receive a safe service. Staff were aware of their role and responsibility in protecting people from avoidable harm. They had attended appropriate safeguarding training and had policies and procedures available to them. Some issues were identified with the environment and risks associated to people’s needs had not all been risk assessed. The registered manager took immediate action during our inspection to address these issues.

People were supported by appropriate staffing levels to meet their dependency needs. The staffing levels were regularly reviewed and were flexible to respond to people’s changing needs. The provider had safe staff recruitment procedures and these were followed. The storage and management of medicines were found to be safe.

People received an effective service. Improvements had been made to how people’s hydration and nutritional needs were assessed and planned for. Staff had the required information to meet these needs.

Staff received an appropriate induction, ongoing training, support and opportunities to review their work. Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards that protected people’s human rights. People were supported to maintain good health and staff worked well with external healthcare professionals.

People continued to receive good care. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect by the staff. People’s care records included detailed and personalised information which enabled staff to support people in line with their personal preferences. People had access to independent advocacy information should they have required this support.

People continued to receive a responsive service. Assessments were completed and support plans developed. This information supported staff to provide a responsive service based on people’s needs, routines and interests. People had access to the provider’s complaint policy and procedure. Where concerns had been raised they had been responded to appropriately.

The service continued to be well-led. The provider had arrangements in place for monitoring and assessing the quality and safety of the service. These included seeking and acting upon the views for people who used the service and others.