Ashurst Park Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. Several people had really benefitted from living at Ashurst Park. Through the input of staff their lives had improved. Staff were good at monitoring people’s health, using national recognised treatments and processes. Where people lacked consent the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was followed so the least restrictive practices were introduced.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their needs.

People were assessed prior to moving into Ashurst Park Care Home. This was to help ensure the service could meet their needs. Although this process was in place, as previously referred to in our key question of Safe, we found people with a learning disability had not been appropriate assessed in line with the RSRCRC statutory guidance.

However, in terms of their medical and complex health needs, everyone living at the service was receiving appropriate care and people’s care plans were regularly reviewed to help ensure they reflected the person’s most up to date requirements.

Staff planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People had the opportunity to express their wishes and views around their care and treatment. One person chose to spend their time in bed due to their fear of falling and staff supported them with this.

Pressure relieving equipment was used for people who were at high risk of their skin breaking down and guidance was in place for staff in terms of repositioning the person. This had resulted in no one currently living at the service experiencing a pressure sore.

People with diabetes had individualised care plans in place and regular blood glucose monitoring and foot care was carried out.

Staff worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff worked closely with external healthcare professionals to support with a person’s care needs and it was clear the registered manager and deputy manager had developed a good working relationship with the same goal of providing high quality, safe care. The deputy manager told us, “My main role day to day is ensuring people’s needs are met. We have delegation of duties. I support the manager managing the home.”

Staff had a good understanding of people’s health needs. Staff were able to describe the signs that one person would display when experiencing a seizure, telling us, “You will notice his eyes rolling and involuntary movement. There is a timer, we start this and then make sure we don’t leave him. This means the nurses will know how long the seizure is and if they have to give medication or not.”

A relative told us, “Everyone we speak to can tell us how mum is on any given day. Nurses are observant and recently picked up on increased falls which led them to apply for funding for a 1:1 to look at preventing this.”

Senior staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People told us their health needs were met. One person said, “The nurses are very helpful with that and there is a dentist that comes in.” A relative told us staff were good at ensuring their family member ate enough and their nutritional needs were met. They told us, “He has put on weight since he has been here. He likes the food. He says he is happy here.” A second relative said staff monitored their family member’s fluid intake, saying, “His 1:1 will check his fluids. She (staff member) is on everything, she doesn’t miss a trick.”

Staff had a good understanding of the dysphagia diet standards used for supporting people who had swallowing difficulties. One told us, “It’s a framework that nurses use to assess the person’s difficulty with swallowing and the appropriate food consistency.” One person had suffered with their stomach issues since moving in and staff had followed up on that by sending a sample off to be tested.

People were involved in their health needs. One person wrote their nutritional care plan alongside the community dietician.

Senior staff monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The registered manager was able to give us several examples of improvements to people since moving into the service. This included one person who had countless seizures on a daily basis. When they moved in, staff started to investigate the cause of these and identified it was due to constipation which people with a learning disability can be at increased risk of. They started to treat the person and their seizures dramatically reduced. Their relative said, “The change in him is huge (since he came here).”

Another person was bedridden due to their anxiety around moving and believing their catheter would become blocked. This significantly impacted their daily life, which included poor nutrition, weight loss, and fatigue. The registered manager had several 1:1 sessions with them to discuss switching to a different type of catheter. This resulted in the person eating better again and after 3 years of being bedridden, they were rehabilitated, started walking again and were discharged back to their own home.

A third person was identified as being frightened at being left alone. The registered manager arranged for a staff member to be with them on a 1:1 24-hours a day and after some time, the person started to sleep through the night. This calmed them and in turn they started to eat and drink again.

A further person had been identified as having an undiagnosed medical condition by the registered manager and upon their insistence received medical input. This had resulted in the person’s aggression reducing because they were no longer in pain

The registered manager told us, “At the last inspection 99% of people stayed in their bedrooms. The first thing I did was to ensure that everyone now comes out of their rooms. Specialist chairs were purchased so everyone can come out. Even bariatric residents we use Teams so they can see what is going on. This helps to make the last days and months for people more memorable and stress free.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People said they were asked for their consent prior to staff providing care. One person said, “They asked my consent before doing anything. I wouldn’t have them do anything behind my back as it’s my privilege.”

Staff had a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Health Act 2005, with one telling us, “We have to assume they have capacity to make their own decision. If assessed they don’t have capacity then we make restrictions in the least restrictive way.” Another staff member said, “The main thing is the presumption of capacity and supporting them to make their own decisions.”

People had capacity assessments and bests interest decisions in place in relation to various aspects of their care, such as living in an environment with a locked door, having 1:1 staffing, having bed rails in place or a sensor mat in their room. Where restrictions were in place senior staff had submitted appropriate Deprivation of Liberty applications. The registered manager kept a tracker for these monitoring their approval or date of renewal.