CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ash Cottage
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but meaningful activities were not always available.
The inspection was unannounced. Inspectors visited on 3 and 5 January 2023. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, staffing and the home's management systems.
All five areas were rated Good. People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff were recruited with appropriate checks, medicines were managed safely, and risks to people's health and wellbeing were identified and reviewed.
Inspectors found respectful and caring support. People were involved in decisions about their care, their privacy was protected, and staff supported choice and independence. Health and dietary needs were also being met.
There were not always enough meaningful activities after the activities co-ordinator left. The home was recruiting a replacement, and inspectors recommended an engaging activity schedule. Some staff training was out of date and supervisions were sometimes infrequent, but the manager agreed to address this.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to raise safeguarding concerns, and risks were assessed and managed.
“Everyone we spoke with said that they felt safe living at Ash Cottage.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered by trained staff. Records were complete and audits were carried out.
“Medicines were managed safely and administered by trained staff.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff treated people with dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“Staff supported people in a way which promoted their privacy, dignity and independence.” from the report
Good communication
Relatives said communication with management was open and frequent. People and relatives could give feedback through meetings and surveys.
“Relatives told us the manager communicated openly.” from the report
Positive culture
Inspectors saw a calm atmosphere and good relationships between people and staff. Staff spoke positively about teamwork.
“There was a positive culture at the home.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingPeople were not always supported with activities that mattered to them. The activities co-ordinator had left, and recruitment was ongoing, so inspectors recommended a more engaging activity schedule.
“People were not always supported to take part in activities that were important to them.” from the report
Training and supervision
needs fixingSome staff training was out of date and supervision meetings were sometimes infrequent. The manager agreed to address these issues.
“Training was taking place, although some staff members training was out of date.” from the report
Registered manager application
minorThere was no registered manager in post when inspectors visited. The current manager had applied to register, and the application was still being assessed.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What meaningful activities are now available, and how are they matched to each person's interests and abilities?
- 02Has the activities co-ordinator role been filled, and how is the activity schedule being monitored?
- 03Have all staff completed the training that was out of date at the inspection?
- 04How often do staff now receive supervision, and how is this checked?
- 05Has the current manager's application to register been approved?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control; the overall rating and all five question ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 January 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, January 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control measures but some cleanliness standards and checks were not reliable.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 6 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, staffing pressures and the effect these could have on people.
The home had enough personal protective equipment, and staff were trained to use it. Staff were observed using PPE correctly. Testing, visiting arrangements, vaccination checks and admission procedures were in place.
Inspectors found some areas were not clean enough. Cleaning schedules did not give staff enough detail, and some problems had not been found by the home's checks. The managers said action was being taken.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a graded overall rating or a graded rating for Safe.
PPE and hand hygiene
Staff had training and access to PPE. Inspectors saw staff and managers using it correctly.
“We were assured the provider was using personal protective equipment (PPE) effectively and safely. We noted staff wearing appropriate PPE.” from the report
COVID-19 controls
The home had processes for testing, safe visits, vaccination checks and reducing the spread of infection.
“There were effective processes to minimise the risk to people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading COVID-19.” from the report
Staffing arrangements
The home said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures. Recruitment of more care and domestic staff was under way.
“There were sufficient staff to provide continuity of support should there be a staff shortage.” from the report
Cleanliness
needs fixingSome areas were not clean enough. The cleaning schedules did not contain enough detail to guide staff.
“We found some areas where cleanliness was not always up to standard.” from the report
Checks did not find all problems
needs fixingThe home carried out regular environmental and cleanliness checks, but these had not identified some of the shortfalls found during the inspection.
“However, some of the shortfalls we noted had not been recognised.” from the report
- 01What specific cleanliness problems were found, and have all of them now been corrected?
- 02How have the cleaning schedules been changed to give staff clearer instructions?
- 03How often are cleanliness checks now completed, and how is management checking that they find problems?
- 04Has the recruitment of additional care and domestic staff been completed?
- 05How are testing, PPE, vaccination checks and visiting arrangements being kept up to date?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it did not provide a full assessment or graded ratings for all areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 January 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 Ash Cottage
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 June 2016.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.