CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashbourne House - Stockport
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infection, using protective equipment safely, carrying out testing and keeping its infection-control policy up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Ashbourne House - Stockport: targeted inspection found strong infection-control arrangements, but the service was not rated.
Inspectors visited on 3 November 2020. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found good practice in visiting arrangements, contact with families, testing, admissions, use of protective equipment and cleaning. The home had plans for managing an outbreak and keeping people safe if staffing became difficult.
Inspectors said they were assured that infection-control procedures were being followed. The overall service and Safe question were marked “Inspected but not rated”, so this report does not give a quality rating for the home.
Safer visiting
The home created a separate room for booked visits through a sealed window and intercom. The room and intercom were sanitised after each visit.
“The service had implemented a safe procedure for outside visiting.” from the report
Keeping families connected
People could use telephone and video calls to stay in touch. The home also streamed exercise classes and concerts.
“The service ensured people were supported to keep in contact with friends and family through the use of telephone and video calls.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had plans for separating groups and areas if an outbreak occurred. Staff were allocated to support particular groups where possible.
“The service had comprehensive contingency plans in place to cohort and zone areas in the event of an outbreak.” from the report
Cleaning and protective equipment
Inspectors found the home very clean, with extra cleaning twice a day, additional deep cleans and protective-equipment stations around the building.
“The home was very clean.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection-control arrangements are still in place now, including cleaning schedules and protective-equipment supplies?
- 02How are visits arranged now, and how can residents keep in contact with relatives if an outbreak occurs?
- 03What is the current process for admitting someone from hospital or the community, including testing and isolation?
- 04How would the home manage staff shortages during an outbreak, and is the contingency arrangement with an agency still available?
- 05The report says capacity was temporarily reduced. What is the current number of residents and available places?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 November 2020 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, June 2019
Ashbourne House - Stockport was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no serious risks or concerns.
Inspectors visited on 21 and 23 May 2019. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with 15 people, visitors and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training, rotas and quality checks.
They found people felt safe and that risks, medicines, staffing and infection control were managed well. The home was clean and maintained. People received help with food, drinks and health appointments, and staff had suitable training and support.
Inspectors saw kind and respectful care. Care plans included people's choices, histories and needs. There were activities in the home and community, and people could raise concerns with managers.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection published in November 2016.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff were trained to recognise and report abuse. Risk assessments were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People were safe and protected from avoidable harm.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff behaving kindly and sensitively. People were involved in decisions, and staff supported their privacy, dignity and independence.
“We observed staff interacted with people in a kind and sensitive manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's life histories, preferences, interests and support needs. Staff said the records gave them enough information to provide care.
“Records included an "About me" document.” from the report
Activities and family contact
The home offered activities in the home and community. People also had access to telephones, Wi-Fi and computers to stay in touch with relatives.
“We saw there was a range of activities on offer, both in the home and in the community to help prevent people becoming socially isolated and to keep people active.” from the report
Good oversight
The manager used regular audits and reviewed accidents, safeguarding concerns and complaints. Staff and residents said their views were listened to.
“We found there were good systems of daily, weekly, monthly and annual quality assurance checks and audits.” from the report
Water temperature checks
minorInspectors found some water temperatures were above recommended safe levels. The bathing risk assessments were updated and remedial action had been taken by the inspection.
“following water temperatures being identified as being above recommended safe levels, risk assessments for safe bathing had been updated and remedial action had been taken.” from the report
Staff identity photographs
minorTwo staff files initially did not contain photographs. The manager provided additional identity evidence, and photographs had been added by the second day.
“Two files did not have photographs of the staff member.” from the report
- 01How do you now check and record bathing water temperatures?
- 02How do you make sure staffing levels remain enough for people's needs at different times of day?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 04What activities would be suitable for my relative, including activities outside the home?
- 05How can my relative and family raise a concern, and how will it be followed up?
This was a planned inspection of the care provided and the premises, covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 June 2019 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 Ashbourne House - Stockport
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 2010.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockport
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. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.