Aston House

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

People were safe at Aston House. Staff knew people well and were attentive and kind in their interactions with people. People spoke positively about staff and felt there were sufficient staff to meet their needs. Our observations and records confirmed this. Policies and procedures were in place regarding both infection prevention and control, and medicine management to promote people’s safety. Clear guidance was provided to staff to ensure care was delivered in a safe and person-centred way. Staff told us they felt supported in their role and they were recruited in a safe way in line with the provider’s policy. The registered manager had good oversight to promote good, safe practices within the home and action was taken to address concerns and encourage learning when needed.

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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

There were sufficient staff on duty at the home to meet people’s needs. We observed staff respond promptly to check on those who needed support and offer regular assurance to people. Staff were having nice conversations with people and there was an open, friendly feel throughout the home. People responded positively when interacting with staff, there was evidence that they felt comfortable in each other’s presence.

Staff told us they felt there were enough staff to care for people effectively in a way which was personalised to them. One staff member told us, “We have a strong team, we do have enough staff including at weekends, evenings and busy times.” Staff felt supported and confirmed that they received regular supervision which they found meaningful and were confident any concerns they raised would be acted upon by management. Staff spoke positively about the opportunities they have to undertake regular training, including completing the Care Certificate and additional courses of areas they may be specifically interested in.

People were safe with an appropriate number of staff to support them. People and relatives spoke positively about staff. They expressed feeling comfortable with staff who knew them well. One person told us, “Staff here are lovely, they can’t do enough for you, really friendly people.” A relative said, “Aston House and all the staff have been absolutely incredible. Staff have gone above and beyond, they have really worked hard, even managing [person’s] health needs so well. I have nothing negative to say.”

Staff were recruited in a safe and robust manner. Recruitment files confirmed that appropriate checks had been completed to ensure staff were safe to work with people living at Aston House. Records also confirmed that safe staffing levels were regularly maintained, and the registered manager kept close oversight of this. Some people had specific needs which required monitoring throughout the night and these needs were safely met. Agency staff were utilised when needed and were provided with clear direction on how to meet people’s needs via a detailed document and handover. Staff supervision was being completed in line with the provider’s policy. Staff had completed appropriate training and regular competency checks were undertaken to ensure their knowledge remained up to date and relevant.

The provider’s infection prevention and control policy was robust and up to date. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of this. Regular environmental checks were completed by the registered manager and the home had a maintenance person on-call should any emergencies arise. Cleaning checklists were in place to guide staff what areas needed to be cleaned and which had been completed.

People’s feedback regarding the cleanliness of their home was positive. They felt that the home was clean and well maintained. People told us that staff supported them to keep their rooms and personal space how they wanted it. One person said, “I like to keep my room spotless, that's my choice and I like it that way.” Relatives were also satisfied with the cleanliness at the home. One told us, “Everyone is well looked after, [staff] took away my anxiety of leaving [person] somewhere. If I had known they would be looked after to this quality, I would not have worried.”

The home was clean and tidy throughout. The inspector on-site saw systems and processes being followed by staff to ensure good infection prevention and control throughout the building. People’s rooms, bathrooms and communal areas were all observed and were clean and well maintained. Where people preferred to keep a large number of items in their own room, this was supported by staff in a safe and personalised way. Staff were observed to be wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriately and correctly.

Staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control and spoke of confidence regarding the cleanliness at the home. They confirmed there was a plentiful supply of personal protective equipment (PPE) and they knew how to use this correctly. Staff told us that the registered manager does checks throughout the day to ensure that cleaning tasks are completed correctly. The registered manager told us that they are implementing a new day cleaning schedule to continually improve the cleaning at Aston House.

The registered manager regularly undertook a quality assurance audit specifically for medicines. We saw that action had been taken on any issues found and learning was shared with staff following these. There was clear guidance in place to support staff to give people their medicines safely and correctly. This included person-centred protocols for as and when required (PRN) medicines. The provider’s medicine policy was up to date and staff demonstrated good awareness of this. The registered manager and staff worked closely with other external medical professionals to promote good practice in relation to medicines.

People told us they were confident that staff managed their medicines safely. One person gave an example regarding their pain medicines explaining that staff know exactly when they need them. Relatives were also happy with the support staff provided with medicines. One told us, “They manage his health need just fabulously. They always call me if there are any issues and will contact the GP or an ambulance. They are so on the ball.” People’s capacity in relation to their medicines had been assessed, and suitable plans were in place to support them in a way which was personalised to them.

Staff were trained to safely administer medicines. They also had regular competency checks to ensure they remained suitable to do this safely. We saw that action had been taken by the registered manager to address any concerns following these checks. A professional who is in regular contact with the service spoke highly of the medicine management at Aston House. They said, “Medication is managed well, staff are trained to do insulin. One person has very complex diabetes and they managing it very well.”