You are here

Ashurst Mews Care Home Outstanding

The provider of this service changed - see old profile


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Ashurst Mews Care Home on 9 September 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Ashurst Mews Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 13 August 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service:

Ashurst Mews Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to 60 older people. The service is purpose built to meet the needs of people using the service. At the time of the inspection there were 56 people using the service.

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

People were at the very heart of the service. Staff promoted people's right to make choices in every aspect of their lives and actively supported them to maintain their independence.

The staff at Ashurst Mews were committed to making sure people lived fulfilling lives and were highly motivated with a 'can do' approach which meant they were able to achieve positive outcomes for people. Without exception, people spoke positively about the management and of their care experiences.

It was clear the culture within the service valued the uniqueness of all individuals who lived there. The provider used person centred and innovative ways to provide people with the support they needed, based on best practice.

The staff and the management team were passionate about providing people with support that was based on their individual needs, goals and aspirations. As a result, their care was tailored to meet their exact needs.

The service took a key role in the local community and was actively involved in building further links. The arrangements for social activities were inventive and met people’s individual needs.

There was a high level of satisfaction with the service and people were well supported to express their views, so improvements could be made. There was strong leadership that put people first and set high expectations for staff.

We found an open ethos with a clear vision and values which were put into practice by staff, who were proud to work for the service and felt valued for their work. A very positive culture was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff and management when we talked with them about how they supported people.

People received safe care and were protected against avoidable harm, neglect and discrimination. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and strategies were put in place to reduce any risks. There were sufficient numbers of staff who had been safely recruited to meet people’s needs.

Peoples medicines were safely managed, and systems were in place to control and prevent the spread of infection.

People’s care needs were assessed before they went to live at the service, to ensure their needs could be fully met. Staff received an induction when they first commenced work at the service and ongoing training that enabled them to have the skills and knowledge to provide effective care.

People were supported to eat and drink enough and staff placed a strong emphasis on the dining experience to ensure it was enjoyed by all. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and access healthcare services.

The service had a vibrant and welcoming atmosphere where visitors were welcomed and encouraged. The premises was homely and purpose built to meet the needs of people using the service.

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

Staff provided care and support in a very caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service very well and had built up kind and compassionate relationships with them. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

The last rating for this service was : (published 23 March 2017) At this inspection we found the service had improved to Outstanding.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we r

Inspection carried out on 22 February 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on the 22 February 2017 and was unannounced.

The service is registered to provide accommodation for up to 60 older people who require nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were 55 people staying there.

The service 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.

There were not always sufficient enough staff to meet people’s needs in a safe and timely way. However, once this had been drawn to the registered manager’s attention they had been proactive and made changes to the deployment of staff and agreed to keep this under review.

People received care from staff that knew them well and were kind, compassionate and respectful. Their needs were assessed prior to coming to the home; care plans were person-centred and regularly reviewed.

There were appropriate recruitment processes in place which ensured that people were protected from being cared for by unsuitable staff and people felt safe in the home. Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people and knew how to respond if they had any concerns.

Staff were supported through regular supervisions and undertook training which helped them to understand the needs of the people they were supporting. People were involved in decisions about the way in which their care and support was provided. Staff understood the need to undertake specific assessments where people lacked capacity to consent to their care and / or their day to day routines. People’s health care and nutritional needs were carefully considered and acted upon. Appropriate health care professionals were appropriately involved in people’s care.

People were cared for by staff that were respectful of their dignity and that demonstrated an understanding of each person’s needs. This was evident in the way staff spoke with people and the activities they engaged in with individuals. Relatives spoke positively about the care their relative received and felt that they could approach management and staff to discuss any issues or concerns they had.

There were a range of audits in place and action was taken to address any shortfalls found. The registered manager was visible and open to feedback, actively looking at ways to improve the service.