CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashcroft
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, managed risks and safely handled medicines. They noted that some useful details about supporting people when distressed were not always recorded in care plans.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had assessments and detailed care plans. Staff were supported with training, food and drink needs were monitored, and the home worked with health professionals. The report said most staff training was up to date, with courses booked to address shortfalls.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors saw kind, respectful and compassionate interactions. People and relatives were highly positive, and the home regularly used people's views to shape activities, menus and the environment.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and records reflected people's needs and preferences. People could choose their routines and were offered a wide range of activities, including trips and social events.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had strong leadership and systems to monitor quality and safety. The management team acted on feedback and audit findings and looked for ways to improve the service.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Ashcroft was rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring, and inspectors found kind, personalised care with only minor record-keeping and training shortfalls.
Inspectors visited on 17 and 26 April 2018. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting health professional. They also reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Caring. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, suitable training and support, good food choices, personalised care and strong management.
The caring rating had improved from Good to Outstanding since the previous inspection. The overall rating remained Good. Inspectors found a strong culture of treating people with dignity and involving them in decisions about the home.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found a strong culture of dignity, respect and compassion. Staff supported people's independence and adapted care to their individual preferences.
“We observed staff support a person who started to take their clothes off in one of the communal rooms. They calmly and skilfully protected the person's dignity while not being judgmental.” from the report
People's views shaped the home
People were involved in decisions about menus, activities and the environment. The home introduced changes in response to what people asked for.
“This showed the service was continuously seeking and acting on people's views.” from the report
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, managed risks and accurate medicine records. The building was clean and well maintained.
“People's medicines were managed safely and effectively. The medication records we looked at had been completed accurately.” from the report
Personalised dementia environment
The first floor had been adapted to help people living with dementia recognise their rooms, remain independent and take part in familiar activities.
“The first floor was 'dementia friendly'. Bedroom doors were painted in bright colours, with doorknockers and people's names on which helps people remain independent in recognising their own room.” from the report
Strong oversight and improvement
The management team used audits, surveys and feedback to identify changes. Inspectors found evidence that the home acted on what it learned.
“The service had a strongly embedded culture of learning and improvement.” from the report
Some support details were not recorded
needs fixingStaff could explain helpful ways to calm a person who became anxious or distressed, but these details were not always included in care plans. The manager said this would be dealt with immediately.
“However, we found these details were not always recorded in people's care plans.” from the report
Some training was outstanding
minorMost staff were up to date with required training, but there were some shortfalls. Courses had been booked to address them.
“The training report for the service showed the majority of staff were up to date with the training they were required to do.” from the report
- 01Have all the useful ways of supporting people who become anxious or distressed now been added to their care plans?
- 02Is all required staff training currently complete, and how are any remaining gaps checked?
- 03How will you continue to involve residents and relatives in decisions about activities, food and the home environment?
- 04How do you make sure care plans are updated promptly when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 05What quality checks are currently used to monitor medicines, staffing and people's experiences?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating and each individual question rating reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 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.
Every inspection of Ashcroft
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
99 live-in carers within about an hour of Bradford
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 £1,250 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.