CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashbrook House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and visiting arrangements, with some further development suggested.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 13 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors were assured that the home used suitable measures for visitors, PPE, testing, cleaning, ventilation, admissions and managing possible outbreaks. The home also recorded residents' health and shared information with healthcare professionals when needed.
The inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was marked inspected but not rated, so this report is not a full assessment of the home's care.
Health monitoring
The home introduced new records for daily health observations and shared information with healthcare professionals when needed.
“The provider had developed new ways of recording daily observations about people's health which were shared with healthcare professionals and appointments were arranged where required.” from the report
Safer visiting
The home used a separate visiting room, booked and staggered visits, visitor screening, testing and protective equipment to reduce infection risks.
“The provider was following best practice guidance to prevent visitors to the home spreading the Covid-19 infection.” from the report
Maintaining contact
The home supported contact with relatives and friends through video calls, telephone calls, garden visits and other arrangements during restrictions.
“The provider supported alternative forms of maintaining social contact for friends and relatives; for example, keeping in touch using video calls, visiting in the communal garden in the summer months and using a telephone to communicate.” from the report
Resident activities
The home arranged activities intended to support residents' wellbeing and morale during the pandemic.
“The provide had arranged activities for residents to promote well-being and morale, including a first aid course in the garden, regular takeaway nights and visits to a local park.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not describe this as a breach or identify a specific safety failure.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the infection prevention and control approach since the inspection?
- 02How are staffing pressures monitored, and how could they affect residents' care?
- 03What action was taken after inspectors signposted the home to resources to develop its approach?
- 04How do current visiting arrangements work, including testing, PPE and contact with other residents?
- 05How are residents' daily health observations recorded and shared with healthcare professionals?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide a full rating of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and person-centred support, with two safety issues addressed during or soon after the inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection of the home on 3 July 2019. One inspector spoke with two people, three care staff, the registered manager and two relatives. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, risk assessments and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, good healthcare support and respectful care. People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities.
Inspectors found that one person did not have a suitable smoking risk assessment at the time of the visit. They also found that hot water in the kitchen and laundry room was too hot, although people were supervised there. The smoking assessment was sent the next day and action was taken to fix the water temperatures.
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff to support people during both the day and night.
“There were enough staff at the home to meet people needs to ensure that staff were available to support people during the day and at night.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed speaking positively with people and supporting their dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed positive interactions with people on the day on inspection with staff engaging in meaningful conversation in relation to people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, communication needs, dreams and goals. Staff knew how people preferred to be supported.
“People received personalised care that reflected their preferences and enabled them to make informed choices in their day to day lives.” from the report
Good oversight
The manager used audits and staff competency checks to monitor care, records and safety, and acted when issues were found.
“Regular quality assurance audits were conducted to ensure people's records were up to date, and that health and safety or premises issues were regularly addressed.” from the report
Missing smoking risk assessment
seriousOne person did not have a suitable smoking risk assessment in place during the inspection. An adequate assessment was sent to inspectors the following day.
“We identified that one person did not have a suitable smoking risk assessment in place to ensure that this task was managed safely for them and others.” from the report
Hot water temperatures
seriousHot water in the kitchen and laundry room was above safe levels. People were supervised in these areas and the manager promptly arranged for the problem to be fixed.
“On the day of inspection we fed back to the registered manager that hot water temperatures in the kitchen and laundry room exceeded safe levels.” from the report
- 01Has the smoking risk assessment been reviewed recently, and how is safe smoking now managed?
- 02Were the hot water temperatures in the kitchen and laundry room fixed, and how are they checked now?
- 03How will you support my relative to make choices and become more independent in daily life?
- 04How are changes in my relative's health needs shared with relatives and healthcare professionals?
- 05How can my relative raise a complaint or concern, including if they need information in a pictorial format?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions, including care, premises, records, medicines, staff support and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 July 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 Ashbrook House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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 Merton
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 £1,230 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at 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.