CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ardent Residential Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, April 2023
Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care but concerns about the building, activities and management systems.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 30 March 2023. Two inspectors spoke with five people and seven staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment and supervision files, and management records.
People said they were happy and appeared relaxed and comfortable. Staff knew people well, gave medicines safely, responded to health needs and had enough staff to meet assessed care needs. Training, safeguarding and infection control arrangements were also found to be suitable.
The building was not fully maintained. Inspectors found areas in poor repair, including damaged walls, a stained and worn stair carpet, chipped paint, a leak and an outside area needing attention. There were also times when there was little for people to do.
The overall rating remains Requires Improvement. Safe was rated Good, while Effective and Well-led remained Requires Improvement. Caring and Responsive were not inspected in this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Kind staff
People said they were happy with the care. Inspectors saw staff chatting with people and found them relaxed and comfortable.
“People looked relaxed, happy and comfortable with staff supporting them.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely. Records showed medicines had been given as prescribed without gaps in the administration records.
“There were no gaps in medicines administration records (MARs) and when people were prescribed 'as required' medicines there were protocols in place” from the report
Suitable staffing and training
Staffing levels were sufficient for people's assessed needs. Recruitment checks, induction, training and staff support were in place.
“Staff were recruited safely in sufficient numbers to ensure people's needs were met.” from the report
Improved consent arrangements
The service had improved how it checked people's capacity and obtained authorisations where restrictions were needed. It was no longer in breach of the consent regulation.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the service was no longer breach in Regulation 11.” from the report
Poor condition of some areas
seriousNot all promised repairs and updates had been completed. Inspectors found neglected areas, damaged surfaces, worn furnishings and an outside area needing attention.
“The provider had failed to ensure the premises was properly maintained.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingInspectors saw periods when there was little happening for people. The manager said the home was looking to employ an activity coordinator.
“However, we observed times when there was not much going on for people on the day of the inspection.” from the report
Previous management breaches remained
needs fixingThe home remained in breach of good governance and registration notification requirements because improvements had not yet been embedded.
“These breaches remain in place as it has only been 3 months since the last inspection and there has been insufficient time to embed improvements into the service.” from the report
- 01Which repairs and improvements identified in the report have now been completed, and can we see the areas concerned?
- 02What activities are currently available each day, and who is responsible for organising them?
- 03What is the timetable for completing the remaining premises work?
- 04How are you checking that previous governance and incident-notification breaches have been resolved?
- 05What were the previous ratings for Caring and Responsive, which were not assessed during this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 April 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Ardent Residential Care Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found gaps in person-centred care, consent, activities and management checks.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 2 November 2022, spoke with people, staff, relatives and healthcare professionals, observed care, and checked care plans and management records.
The home had made some environmental improvements, and further work was planned. However, people's needs and preferences were not always recorded or met. Some people had little meaningful activity, and one person was sometimes given food that increased their risk of choking.
Inspectors also found that decisions were sometimes made for people without recorded mental capacity assessments. Management checks had not found all these problems, and some required notifications had not been sent to the CQC.
The overall rating remains Requires Improvement. This inspection rated Effective, Responsive and Well-led as Requires Improvement. Safe and Caring were not covered by this focused inspection, so this report does not provide new ratings for them.
Improving environment
Inspectors found that refurbishment had started and further work was planned. People gave positive feedback about the decorated areas.
“It is very homely. I can take my dog in there which is lovely for all the residents.” from the report
Choices and consent in daily care
People said they were offered choices during the day and staff asked for consent before care tasks.
“People told us they were given choices throughout the day and staff asked for consent before providing care or support.” from the report
Raising concerns
People and relatives said they could speak to staff and managers about concerns or ideas. Complaints had been investigated.
“People told us communication with management was good and they felt able to raise any concerns or ideas with them.” from the report
Staff support
Staff had induction, meetings and regular supervision. Inspectors found that staff knew people's likes, dislikes and difficulties.
“Staff meetings were held to share information, updates and best practice with staff.” from the report
Risk from unsuitable food
seriousA person who needed modified food was sometimes given food that did not follow specialist advice. Inspectors said this increased the risk of choking.
“However, at times they had been given food that did not meet the advice provided. This increased their risk of choking.” from the report
Mental capacity decisions
seriousThe home sometimes made decisions for people without recording assessments of whether they could make those decisions themselves. This was a breach of the consent regulation.
“Some decisions were being made on behalf of people; however, no assessments of people's capacity to make the decisions themselves had been undertaken.” from the report
Too little meaningful activity
seriousPeople were not regularly offered activities based on their interests. Many people spent time in the lounge with little to do and limited staff engagement.
“Most people did not watch the television but stared into space.” from the report
Management checks missed problems
seriousThe home's monitoring systems did not identify all the concerns found by inspectors, including the lack of activities and gaps in care records.
“Quality assurance systems had not monitored all the areas for improvement we identified.” from the report
Notifications were not submitted
seriousThe provider had not sent some required statutory notifications to the CQC. This was a breach of the registration regulations.
“The provider had failed to ensure statutory notifications were submitted in line with regulatory requirements.” from the report
- 01How will you record and provide daily activities that match my relative's interests and preferences?
- 02How do you assess whether a person can make each decision, and how do you record best-interest decisions when they cannot?
- 03What checks now make sure modified diets and specialist eating advice are followed at every meal?
- 04What changes have been made to quality checks so problems with care plans, activities and people's feedback are found promptly?
- 05What refurbishment has been completed since the inspection, and what further environmental work remains?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Effective, Responsive and Well-led; Safe and Caring were not inspected and their ratings were not newly assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 December 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Ardent Residential Care Home
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- April 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Ardent Residential Care Home →
- December 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Ardent Residential Care Home →
- June 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 March 2021.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Plymouth
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.