You are here

Eight Ash Court Limited Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

About the service

Eight Ash Court Limited is a residential care home providing personal care for 12 people who have a learning disability. Some people also had a physical disability.

The service consists of two bungalows, each providing domestic style accommodation for up to six people. There was no identifying signage outside the premises or on the service’s mini buses to identify it as a care home. This was in keeping with the design principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible as part of the community and achieve the best possible outcomes.

The principles of Registering the Right Support also reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. This required further development. People had been living in the service for a long time and staff knew them and their families very well. However, the positive feedback the service received from relatives had led to the provider not exploring new initiatives in learning disabilities and/or autism, and seeing how it could be used to consistently support good outcomes for people and promote a better quality of life.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The service didn’t always (consistently) apply the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people did not fully reflect the principles and values of Registering the Right Support for the following reasons, people were not always supported to participate in meaningful activities and decisions made in people’s best interests had not been fully assessed and documented.

The system to identify and mitigate potential risks were not robust enough to ensure people were always safe. We have made a recommendation for improvement in this area. Appropriate reports to safeguarding professionals had not been made by staff and staff were not able to tell us about how safeguarding concerns should be reported, without prompting. There is currently an investigation being undertaken relating to this and we have recommended the service improve in ensuring safeguarding processes are embedded into practice.

Relatives told us people were supported in a safe, clean environment. However, improvements were needed to ensure infection control processes were always sufficient to ensure people were safe. We have made a recommendation to improve in this area.

Improvements were needed to ensure all management and staff were receiving training to keep their knowledge and skills updated to support them in carrying out their role effectively.

People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not always support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; there were policies and systems in the service supported good practice but this had not always been followed.

People’s privacy and dignity was not always respected. We have made a recommendation that the service improve in this area.

People’s care needs were assessed and planned for. However, they were not always kept up to date to ensure people received a consistent service. We have made recommendations that the service improve in the systems to support people with their oral care and ensure people’s end of life decisions are sought and documented.

The provider’s systems for assessing and monitoring the service were not robust enough to promptly identify shortfalls and address them. We have recommended that the service use the provider’s resources effectively to improve in this area.

Despite the shortfalls we had identified in the service, people and t

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 25 October 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.