You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

Ashtonleigh is a care home. 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.

Ashtonleigh provides accommodation and personal care for up to 54 older people with varied care needs. Some people were living with dementia, whilst others required support with physical illness or disability. There were 49 people using the service at the time of inspection. There were single and double occupancy rooms available. Some people had bathrooms attached to their bedrooms and there were communal facilities for those that did not. There were numerous communal areas for people to relax in, including a large, well maintained garden.

At our last inspection in October 2017, the service was rated 'Requires Improvement' with one breach to the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. During this inspection, we found significant improvements had been made and the provider is now meeting the regulations.

The service had two registered managers. 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.

People told us they felt safe and that staff knew them and any risks to their wellbeing. There were risk assessments for people and for the building, with relevant safety checks completed by the management team each month. Staff were recruited safely and there were suitable numbers so people’s needs were consistently met. Staff had a good understanding of how to recognise potential signs of abuse and what actions to take with any concerns. Medicines were given in a safe, consistent way, by staff who were competent to do so. Any accidents or incidents were analysed and actions taken immediately to prevent their reoccurrence.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practise.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to support people and meet all their needs. They spoke highly of the training offered. Their induction was in depth and gave them opportunities to get to know people, their routines and preferences. Further support was provided in supervisions, appraisals and team meetings.

People’s nutritional needs were met and they were positive about the quality and choice available of food. People had continuous input from a variety of health and social care professionals to improve their wellbeing. People’s health conditions were managed well and staff valued and followed feedback or guidance given by professionals.

Feedback from people, their relatives and a professional was consistent, in that staff were kind, caring and attentive to people’s needs. People's dignity, independence and privacy was promoted and encouraged. Staff knew people, their preferences and support needs well and celebrated special events with them. They took an interest in people’s wishes and did everything possible to make these happen.

Care plans were tailored to individual's and detailed support needs, preferences, people’s life stories and routines. Staff were knowledgeable of people’s communication support needs and used a variety of tools to support them with this. People told us they always felt listened to. There was a clear complaints process and any concerns received had been responded to promptly and professionally. People had choice and control over the activities they wanted to participate in each day. These were tailor-made to people's likes and dislikes and used to support them to reminisce about their past.

People, their relati

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

The service was safe.

Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding processes and risks to people.

People received their medicines safely.

Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

Risks to people were assessed and reviewed regularly. Checks of the environment were completed daily to ensure the building was safe for people to live in.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

The service was effective.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and continuous support to meet people’s needs.

People were given maximum choice and control over their lives.

People’s nutritional needs were met.

People had access to health and social care professionals if they felt unwell.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

The service was caring.

We observed people to have built good relationships with staff who were kind and caring.

People’s independence, privacy and dignity was continually promoted.

Staff had a good understanding of equality and diversity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

The service was responsive.

People’s needs were continuously reviewed and any changes to their wellbeing responded to immediately.

There was a variety of activities offered to people that were person centred to their preferences and life histories.

People and their relatives were aware of the complaints process and felt confident raising any concerns with the management team.

End of life care was provided in a caring and dignified way.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 February 2019

The service was well-led.

Everyone we spoke to was positive about the service and the management team.

Quality assurance systems were robust and any issues identified, well managed.

A team work ethic was promoted and encouraged. Everyone worked together to improve people’s lives and experiences.

Feedback was valued and used to develop and improve the service provision.