Archived: Ashbourne Care Home

Updated 23 March 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by an inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service and understands dementia care.

Service and service type:

Ashbourne Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and

nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did:

Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service since their last inspection. This included notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts which they are required to send us by law. We also contacted the local authority who commissioned services from this provider. They raised no concerns about the service.

During the inspection we spoke with eight people, two relatives, seven members of staff, a mental capacity assessor, the deputy and registered manager. The managing director from the provider came towards the end of the inspection process to hear the feedback. We also spoke with the headteacher from the nearby primary school who conducted regular visits to the home.

We looked at the care and review records for three people who used the service, the management records for how people were administered medicines, as well as a range of records relating to the running of the service and the activities people were involved in. Our overall observations included how people and staff communicated and interacted and how people were supported using the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 23 March 2019

About the service:

• Ashbourne Care Home is a care home providing personal care and accommodation for up to 37 people who are frail or are living with dementia. At this inspection 35 people lived within the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

• People continued to receive safe care. However, people felt while there were enough staff, the deployment of staff was of concern. People were safe and staff knew how to keep them safe. Recruitment systems ensured people were supported by staff who were appropriately employed. People were given their medicines as it was prescribed. Staff had access to personal protective equipment as part of the provider’s procedures for infection control. Accidents and incidents were noted so any trends could be monitored to reduce accidents.

• People continued to receive effective care. Staff had the skills and knowledge required to support people. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People made their own choices as to what they had to eat and drink with support from staff. People could access support from health care professionals when needed.

• People continued to receive support from staff that were of a caring and kind nature. People decided how they were supported by staff. Staff were caring and respectful of people’s privacy, dignity and independence.

• People continued to receive support that was responsive to their needs. People’s support needs were assessed and a care plans developed to inform staff how people’s personal needs should be met. The support people received was what they wanted and reviews took place to ensure where there were changes, these could be identified and acted upon. People’s interests and hobbies were considered so people could take part in the things they liked to do. The provider had a complaints process in place and people knew how to complain.

• The service continued to be well managed. The registered manager supported staff to ensure people received the support they wanted. Quality audits and spot checks took place and where improvements were needed, this was fedback to people. Questionnaires were used to engage with people. The environment was welcoming, warm, clean and tidy.

Rating at last inspection:

• Rated Good (Report published 26/01/2016).

Why we inspected:

• This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. Whilst the service was rated ‘Requires Improvement’ in safe, it remains rated Good overall.

Follow up:

• We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.