Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Ash Grove

Goodpublished 17 December 2024, 21 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, July 2023

Ash Grove rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, but one statutory notification was submitted late.

This was a focused inspection after concerns about medicines and alleged financial and emotional abuse. Inspectors reviewed financial, medicine and care records, spoke with a person, relatives and staff, and contacted the local authority.

The inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concerns raised. They found safe systems for money, medicines, staffing, risks and safeguarding. People were supported with choice, independence, privacy and dignity.

The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Effective and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.

What inspectors praised
  • Safe medicines support

    Inspectors found that medicines were prescribed, given, recorded and stored safely. Staff also followed principles designed to avoid unnecessary over-medication.

    “People were supported by staff who followed systems and processes to prescribe, administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
  • Choice and independence

    Staff supported people to make choices, stay independent and have restrictions used only when necessary and for the shortest possible time.

    “Staff supported people to be independent and have the maximum possible choice and control over their own lives.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors found that staff treated people with kindness, respected their dignity and adapted communication to their individual needs.

    “People received kind and compassionate care from staff who used positive, respectful language which people understood and responded well to.” from the report
  • Enough trained staff

    There were enough staff, including for one-to-one support, so people could take part in activities and visits when they wanted.

    “The service had a sufficient number of staff, including for one-to-one support.” from the report
  • Open management

    Staff said they could raise concerns with managers, and relatives were involved in discussing people's care and the service.

    “Staff felt able to raise concerns with managers without fear of what might happen as a result.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Late statutory notification

    needs fixing

    One notification about allegations of abuse was sent two months late. Inspectors recommended that notifications should be submitted without delay, although they found no impact on the alleged victim's safety.

    “However, on one occasion the notification was submitted 2 months after allegations of abuse had been raised by a member of staff.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to ensure statutory notifications are submitted without delay?
  2. 02How are medicines checked to prevent errors, including double doses?
  3. 03How do you involve people and their families in reviews of care and support?
  4. 04How do you make sure temporary or new staff understand each person's communication and support needs?
  5. 05What evidence can you provide about the areas not inspected during this focused visit?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the last inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 July 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2018

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the home remaining Good since the previous inspection.

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 14 September 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, a relative and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment checks, complaints and quality monitoring.

The home supported four people and could provide care for up to six. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk support and good infection control. Staff understood people's needs and supported their choices, independence, dignity and privacy.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had a new registered manager since the previous inspection, but the overall rating remained Good, as it had been in February 2016.

What inspectors praised
  • Personalised safety support

    Staff knew people's changing risks and adjusted support so people could make choices and remain as safe as possible.

    “Staff adjusted how they cared for people so people were still able to choose what they wanted to do, as safely as possible.” from the report
  • Skilled and coordinated care

    People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff received training and worked with health professionals to support people's health and independence.

    “We saw the types of training staff attended reflected the needs of the people living at the home.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful staff

    Inspectors saw strong relationships between staff and people. Staff respected people's choices, dignity and independence.

    “Staff supported people to make decisions about the care they wanted.” from the report
  • Good involvement and community support

    People and relatives were involved in care planning. Staff supported people to attend important events, appointments and activities in the local community.

    “People and staff gave us examples which showed people had easy access to local services and communities.” from the report
  • Active management

    The registered manager worked directly with people and used feedback, staff meetings and quality checks to monitor care.

    “We saw the registered manager spent time with people, either directly supporting them or talking with them about their lives.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to medicines management since the inspection, and how are errors checked now?
  2. 02How are people's goals and aspirations recorded and reviewed?
  3. 03What improvements have been made to the garden for people's changing mobility and sensory needs?
  4. 04How will you make sure staffing levels increase when someone is unwell or needs extra support?
  5. 05How are people and relatives involved when care needs change or future care is being planned?

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with observations, discussions and reviews of care, medicines, recruitment and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 October 2018 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Ash Grove

3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Ash Grove →

  2. October 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Ash Grove →

  3. March 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. September 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. November 2012

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 November 2012.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Worcestershire

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. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.

“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
Brian G., about Chris M.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
Katrina O., about Sekai M.
See live-in carers near WorcestershireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.