Ashton View Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment since this provider took over ownership of the home. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Overall, care records were detailed and explained people’s needs and wishes, and how staff should meet these. Some individual care plans and risks assessments required updating, as people’s needs had changed or information was out of date. Care plan reviews had not always been effective in identifying this. The provider took action during the inspection process to make the necessary changes.

Not everyone’s ‘This is Me’ document had been completed. This is used to capture people’s background, work and life history. This meant these people’s care records contained less personalised information. The provider told us it was sometimes difficult to gather this information, for example when people had no next of kin to ask.

None of the people or relatives we spoke with could recall being involved in setting up the care plan nor of this being discussed with them. It was unclear from care records whether people with capacity had been involved, as there was no specific section to capture this, nor to confirm they had been involved in ongoing reviews to ensure care records continued to meet their needs. The provider told us, where able, people’s care was discussed with them during the resident of the day process.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff understood the diverse needs of people and made sure the care and support they provided was in line with their individual needs and preferences. Members of staff worked well with health and social care professionals to ensure people received continuity from everyone involved in their care. We saw evidence of the provider, management and care staff working with social workers to facilitate admissions and discharges and ensure people’s needs were met.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information was available to people in a range of formats, including easy-read, braille, large print, audio format, or with visual and pictorial prompts, depending on their individual needs and preferences. People’s need for alternative formats was discussed during the assessment process, or provided upon request once people had moved in.

Care records contained specifics sections which explained people’s communication needs and preferences, along with whether any aids where prescribed and used, such as hearing aids and glasses. Clear guidance was in place for staff to follow, to ensure people could understand them, and ensure information was shared successfully.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Resident and family meetings had been held in March and July 2026, though attendance had been limited, with no-one turning up to the family meeting in July. Minutes showed there was no set agenda to the meetings, with people and family’s being encouraged to discuss topics or issues of their choosing. It was unclear how often meetings had been held prior to March 2026, as no other minutes, or meeting schedule was shared with us.

The provider sent out an annual survey to gather people and their relatives views about the home and care provided. This had last been done in June 2026, with 27 completed surveys being returned. Feedback was largely positive, though people had reported concerns with staffing levels and consistency, delays in care provision such as support to use the toilet and activity completion. An action plan had been created to address people’s concerns.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.People received care and support at the times of their choosing. Staff were flexible and accommodated changes when people wanted this.

As the provider used an electronic care planning system along with other online systems and processes, they needed to ensure people were not digitally excluded. We looked at how they achieved this, and noted care plans, risk assessment and monitoring charts could all be provided in paper form should this be requested.

People had access to a range of specialist and adaptive equipment, including standing and walking aids, adapted cutlery and sensor equipment.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People’s rights to be treated equally and fairly were being met. People’s protected characteristics were respected and care provided in line with their needs and wishes. The provider and registered manager were aware of their responsibility to avoid discrimination, and to make any reasonable adjustments when needed.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Where people had chosen to discuss these, their wishes regarding end-of-life care were captured within their care records. The care home had links with a local hospice, which would help ensure good quality palliative care was being provided, and staff had the skills and knowledge required to do so.