You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 26 August 2014
Date of Publication: 24 September 2014
Inspection Report published 24 September 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 26 August 2014

During a routine inspection

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. The people who resided at Ash Grove did not use verbal communication. Staff interpreted people�s wishes by observing their body language. At the time of our inspection there was one person who was living in the home permanently and one who was having short term respite care. Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with two people who used the service, three staff who were supporting them and from looking at records. This evidence helped us answer the five questions detailed below.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. We saw that staff were protective towards people to prevent them from risks of accidents and injuries when they mobilised. We observed a relaxed atmosphere and positive relationships between people who were using the service and staff. There were risk management plans in place for people and for general health and safety, such as the premises, fire safety and emergency evacuation of the premises. We looked at staffing levels. This showed us the provider had ensured enough qualified and experienced staff were available to provide appropriate care and support. We were told staffing levels were reviewed when the numbers of people living in the home changed and their dependency needs had been assessed.

CQC monitors the operation of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Some relevant staff had been trained and training was arranged for other staff to attend so they would understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs had been assessed and support plans were in place. We observed staff providing people with choices about what they wanted to eat and what they wanted to do during the day. We saw evidence that relatives had agreed support plans and regular reviews of them. Staff encouraged and supported people in developing living skills and in leading meaningful and enriched lifestyles. We saw that staff respected people�s individual cultures. Staff demonstrated knowledge of people�s needs and support that matched their support plans. Staff had received training to meet the specific needs of the people living in the home. We found that support plans were accompanied by health care plans hospitals had supplied to the home. Arrangements were made so that staff could accompany people in attending GP and hospital appointments.

Is the service caring?

We observed people being supported by staff in a sensitive way that was tailored to each person�s preferences. People were cared for by kind and attentive staff. Staff encouraged and supported people in maintaining their independence. Staff had adopted a flexible system so that they could respond to people�s requests. Staff were aware of people�s rights and respected decisions people made. The care worker who was in charge briefed all new staff about people�s changing needs at the beginning of each shift when there was a change of staff. People were supported by a team of health and social care professionals who worked closely with staff in providing people's care needs.

Is the service responsive?

Talking with staff and looking at records confirmed that staff acted on the recommendations made by health professionals. Before people were admitted to the home staff ensured they had enough information about people�s needs to ensure they were able to meet them. People were supported in accessing the community. People�s preferences and interests had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people�s wishes. We saw the complaints procedure was written in a simple way and had been made available to people and their relatives. The senior care worker showed us that complaints received were investigated and acted on in accordance with the procedure.

Is the service well led?

The service had a system in place for obtaining relatives opinions about the standard of care and support people had received. Regular audits had been carried out that enabled staff to make changes that could be of benefit to the people who used the service. The audit tools included improvements that staff had made. A senior member of staff regularly visited the service and carried out a range of audits. A report was developed and given to senior staff who worked within the home so they could make further improvements. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and the ethos of the service. Staff received regular supervisions by senior staff to ensure they remained competent for their roles.