CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ashcroft House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. The home had risk assessments, fire safety plans, medicine checks, safeguarding training and enough staff to provide consistent care.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and support. People received suitable food and drink, help to access healthcare, and care based on their needs and choices.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw warm and positive interactions. Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, independence and communication needs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records contained detailed information about people's preferences. People were offered choices, personalised activities and support with end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits and feedback to monitor quality. Staff, relatives and people living at the home were involved through meetings and other feedback.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 and 21 May 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care records, staff files, audits and other records.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and were cared for by trained staff who knew their needs and preferences. Medicines, risks, staffing, infection control and the environment were checked and found to be managed safely.
Care was described as kind, respectful and personalised. People were offered choices, activities and support with healthcare. The home had systems for checking quality, listening to feedback and making improvements.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection published in October 2016.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that staff knew people well. Staff supported dignity, privacy and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's routines, preferences, communication needs and life histories. Staff used this information to shape care and activities.
“Care records contained detailed information about people's preferences in relation to their support and treatment.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had inductions, supervision and appraisals. Many had completed care qualifications and additional training for people's specific needs.
“Staff had the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to perform their roles.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and identify improvements. Managers promoted an open approach.
“The service had an effective system to monitor the safety and quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What refurbishment work is still planned, and how will it affect residents during the work?
- 02How would you meet my relative's particular communication needs, especially if they have a sight impairment or do not use English as their first language?
- 03What activities would be available for my relative, and how would you make sure they are meaningful to them?
- 04How would you support my relative's dietary needs and preferences?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care decisions and end of life planning?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC questions rated; the previous overall rating was also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 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.
What inspectors found, November 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but hospital passports had not yet been completed.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 October 2016. Inspectors looked around the home, spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. It was also rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, respectful care and regular management checks.
Care was generally tailored to people's preferences. People and relatives were involved in care discussions, and staff supported people's dignity, nutrition, activities and end of life wishes.
One gap was identified. Work was still underway to put a hospital passport in every care file, but these documents had not yet been completed.
Enough staff
Staffing was assessed against people's needs. Inspectors found enough staff on the day and were told extra staff would be brought in if someone's needs increased.
“We saw that staffing levels were sufficient to meet the needs of the people who currently used the service” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm interactions and found that staff protected people's privacy and dignity during care.
“We found the atmosphere within the home was friendly and relaxed. There was a respectful rapport with staff and people who used the service” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included personal history, preferences and choices. People could choose things such as when to get up, when to go to bed and what to eat.
“The care files we looked at included a range of health and personal information and were person centred.” from the report
Good oversight
The home carried out checks on medicines, care plans, infection control and the building. Inspectors saw that actions were recorded when improvements were needed.
“We saw that where improvements were needed, action was identified and timescales for completion recorded.” from the report
Hospital passports incomplete
needs fixingThe home was working to add a hospital passport to each care file, but the documents were not complete at the inspection. This could mean important personal and health information was not yet ready to go with someone to hospital.
“The registered manager told us that work was underway to include a hospital passport in each file, but these had not yet been completed.” from the report
- 01Have hospital passports now been completed for every resident, and what information do they contain?
- 02How do you review staffing when a resident's needs deteriorate, and how quickly can extra staff be provided?
- 03How are each resident's end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date?
- 04How do you make sure people who cannot join group activities receive regular one-to-one interaction?
- 05How are families updated about changes in a resident's health and care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and providing an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 November 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 Ashcroft House Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 2011.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Sefton
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 £1,270 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.