On the day of this inspection there were 13 people living at Ash Lea House. We spoke with four people who lived at the home. We also spoke with the manager and three other members of staff. We looked at written records, which included people's care records, medication systems and quality assurance documentation.Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, relatives and staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary, please read the full report.
Is the home safe?
The accommodation was warm, clean and properly maintained. People were protected by safe recruitment practices.
The provider had systems in place that ensured the safe receipt, storage, administration and recording of medicines. There were proper processes in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
Is the home effective?
People we spoke with were satisfied with the care and support they received. No one raised any concerns with us. This was consistent with mostly positive feedback reported in the provider's own annual quality assurance survey.
People were cared for by staff who were properly trained and supported to develop professionally. People were treated with respect and were encouraged to promote their independence. People were given information and support to help them understand the care and support available to them.
Is the home caring?
We spoke with four people who lived at the home. Due to their communication needs we were not able to have extended conversations with them. One person said to us, "I love it here; I'm going into town with staff later." Another person said, "I like all the staff."
We witnessed the care and attention people received from staff. All interactions we saw were respectful, encouraging and friendly. There was a relaxed atmosphere throughout the home and a good rapport between staff and the people who lived there.
Is the home responsive?
People were consulted about and involved in their own care planning and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to give consent, we found the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. Care plans and risk assessments were informative, up to date and regularly reviewed.
Three staff members told us that the manager was approachable and they would have no difficulty speaking to them if they had any concerns about the service.
Is the home well led?
Staff said that they felt well supported by the manager, there was a good team ethic and they were able do their jobs safely. The provider had a range of quality monitoring systems in place to ensure that care was being delivered appropriately by staff, that the service was continuously improving and that people were satisfied with the service they were receiving.