You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 May 2018

The inspection was announced and took place on 26 April 2018. We gave the provider 48 hours’ of our intention to undertake the inspection. This was because the service provides domiciliary care to people in their own homes and we needed to make sure someone would be available at the office.

Ghulab Ashram provides personal care for people, living in a purpose built scheme where there are individual flats with shared facilities, such as a dining area and lounge areas. Staff provide personal care and support to people at pre-arranged times and in emergencies. There were 14 people receiving personal care when we inspected. Since the last inspection of Ghulab Ashram the provider has changed and the service was under new ownership. As a result of this change this will be their first ratings inspection of this location.

A registered manager was in place. A 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. The registered manager was not in work at the time of our inspection, the provider had taken action to cover the role and support was being provided from the registered managers from two of the providers other services. On the day of our inspection we met with the head of care services and the senior personal assistant from Ghulab Ashram.

People said they felt safe living at scheme and received support from staff who were kind and respectful towards them. Staff understood how to protect people from abuse and received regular training around how to keep people safe.

People told us they received their medicines as prescribed and there were enough staff to support them. Staff had been recruited following appropriate checks. The provider had arrangements which made sure there were sufficient care staff to provide support to people in their own homes when they needed or wanted help or assistance.

People told us staff and the management team were approachable and if they had any concerns they would be listened to. Staff had received appropriate induction training and on-going training was in place to ensure they had the skills to meet the needs of the people they supported. People had positive relationships with staff, who knew their individual needs.

People told us that the liked the staff who supported them and were positive about the care that they received. They felt they were listened to and staff understood they could only care for and support people who consented to their care. People told us staff were caring, and they were supported to maintain their independence and to access facilities at Ghulab Ashram so they did not feel isolated.

Staff spoke warmly of the people they cared for and said they enjoyed their role and felt supported by management team to provide a good service.

People told us they were involved in the care and support they received. People told us staff were quick to respond when they were unwell and supported them to access other healthcare professionals when required.

Staff treated people with respect and maintained people’s privacy and dignity when providing care. Where needed, people were supported to eat and drink enough to remain healthy. People told us staff helped them prepare meals of their choice if needed or they could attend the on-site restaurant.

Complaints information was available and people and staff were confident of the actions they would take if they had concerns and any concerns would be dealt with appropriately.

People told us they enjoyed living in the scheme and spoke positively about the management team. The provider ensured regular checks were completed to monitor the quality of the care that people received. Areas identified for improvement were acted on.

Inspection areas



Updated 31 May 2018

The service was safe.

People received care from staff they felt safe with and there was sufficient staff to meet and respond to their needs in a safe and timely way.

People were happy with how staff supported them with their medicines.

People were protected from harm by the prevention and control of infection.



Updated 31 May 2018

The service was effective.

People received care in the way they wanted and from staff who were trained in their needs and were well supported by management.

Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities and sought people�s consent before proving care.

Staff supported people to maintain good health by accessing healthcare professionals and supporting them to maintain a healthy diet.



Updated 31 May 2018

The service was caring.

People said they liked the care staff who supported them.

People said staff provided support and care with dignity and kindness.

People were involved in planning their care and said staff respected their choices.



Updated 31 May 2018

The service was responsive.

People received care that met their needs. Staff provided care that took account of people�s individual needs and preferences and offered people choices.

People understood they could complain if needed and how to make a complaint or raise concerns.

People felt staff and the management team were responsive and there were regular opportunities to feedback about the service.



Updated 31 May 2018

The service was well led.

People and staff were complimentary about the service and said it was well managed.

People had care provided by staff that felt supported by the management team.

People benefited from a service which was regularly monitored because the provider had systems in place to check, improve and develop the quality of the service provided.