CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashby Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the home’s leadership and quality checks require improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 March 2019. The inspection team spoke with people living in the home, relatives, the registered manager and staff. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. People were supported to make choices, stay independent, access activities and receive personalised care. People and relatives said staff were friendly and caring, and people felt safe.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for being well-led. Audits did not find every risk or care issue. A suspected abuse incident had not been reported to the relevant authorities, and some staff recruitment checks needed strengthening. The provider supplied evidence after the inspection that some issues were being addressed.
The overall rating was Good. This means the service met the required standard in most areas, but the management weaknesses needed monitoring and improvement. The previous inspection in July 2016 had rated the home Good overall.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise abuse and manage risks, and there were enough staff to provide support.
“People said that they felt safe. Relatives agree their family members were safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw people being treated with kindness and consideration. People were involved in their care and supported to make choices.
“We saw people were treated with kindness and consideration by staff and management.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, interests and routines. Staff knew people well and supported their individual needs.
“Care plans had detailed information about people's likes and dislikes, their aspirations and their hobbies and interests.” from the report
Choice and independence
People could choose activities, meals and routines, and were supported to work and take part in the community.
“People were assisted to have choice and control over their lives.” from the report
Safeguarding was not reported
seriousA suspected abuse incident in 2018 was not reported to the safeguarding authority or CQC as required. This is a serious weakness in the home's safety and oversight systems.
“There had been an incident of suspected abuse of a person in 2018 which had not been reported to the safeguarding authority or to CQC, as required.” from the report
Recruitment risk assessment
seriousOne staff record contained information about past incidents suggesting a possible risk, but there was no assessment of the risk or controls needed before the inspection.
“A risk assessment was not in place to determine the risk level and what, if any, controls were needed to protect people from potentially unsuitable staff.” from the report
Quality checks missed issues
needs fixingThe provider had audits, but they did not identify all risks, reporting failures or some care practice concerns. The overall well-led rating fell to Requires Improvement.
“However, these had not identified all relevant issues of risk.” from the report
Some privacy and respect concerns
minorTwo people said they were sometimes told off, and one person said staff sometimes needed reminding to knock before entering their room. The manager said these matters would be followed up.
“Two people said they were sometimes told off if they didn't clean well or forgot.” from the report
Feedback was incomplete
needs fixingThe home had asked people for their views, but had not asked relatives, staff and external professionals for feedback about the service.
“Questionnaires had not been supplied to relatives, staff and professionals for their views on the quality of care supplied.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure every suspected abuse incident is reported to the safeguarding authority and CQC?
- 02How do you now assess risks linked to information found during staff recruitment checks?
- 03What audits are carried out now, and how do you make sure they identify privacy, dignity and safeguarding issues?
- 04How do you collect feedback from relatives, staff and external professionals, as well as people living in the home?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned showers and accessible accommodation?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the previous Good ratings for safe, effective, caring and responsive care remaining in place and the well-led rating changing to Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 April 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.
What inspectors found, September 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas they assessed.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 14 July 2016. They spoke with two people living there, four staff and the registered manager. They observed care and checked two care plans, medicines, staffing, training and quality records.
The home supported people with a learning disability or autism to live semi-independently. Inspectors found enough trained staff, clear risk assessments and safe medicines systems. People were supported to make choices, manage medicines where possible, cook, work, use the community and take part in activities.
Inspectors found a kind and caring atmosphere. Staff understood people's communication and individual needs. The home also had systems for complaints, meetings, quality checks and keeping staff up to date.
The home was rated Good in every area: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This means the inspection found the required standard of care across all five areas at that time.
Safe staffing and risk planning
Inspectors found enough staff and detailed assessments to support people safely while keeping as much independence as possible.
“There were enough staff available to meet people's needs and staff had been supported with appropriate training and supervision to have the skills needed to care for people appropriately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People supported one another, and staff were described as kind and supportive. Privacy, personal relationships and individual preferences were respected.
“The registered manager and staff had developed a kind and caring service where people supported and thought about each other's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's individual needs, communication methods, likes and dislikes. Care plans were reviewed with people and updated when needed.
“Care plans accurately reflected people's needs and staff had a detailed understanding of people's needs which enabled them to provide effective support.” from the report
Independence and community life
People were supported to make choices, manage medicines, cook, work and use local services. They took part in activities they had chosen.
“People were supported to engage in a wide range of activities of their own choice.” from the report
Open management
People and staff could raise concerns and suggest changes. Regular checks and audits were used to monitor care and the home.
“The registered manager had created an open environment where people living at the home and staff could raise any concerns and input into the development of the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you assess whether my relative can safely manage some or all of their medicines?
- 02If my relative may need restraint, how is this recorded, reviewed and reduced over time?
- 03How will my relative choose their activities, work or community opportunities?
- 04How are mental capacity decisions made, and when would an independent advocate be involved?
- 05What improvements came from the latest surveys and quality audits?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 2016 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 Ashby Court
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 July 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.
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 Lincolnshire
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. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.