CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ashdown Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control. This included PPE, testing, isolation, cleaning, social distancing and safe admissions.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place during the COVID-19 outbreak.
The CQC carried out an unannounced, targeted inspection on 5 March 2021. It focused only on infection prevention and control because the home had a COVID-19 outbreak and the CQC had received concerns about infection control.
Inspectors found policies and risk assessments covering visitors, admissions, testing, isolation, cleaning, ventilation, staffing and social distancing. They were assured that staff used protective equipment safely, testing was taking place, and the home was clean and hygienic.
The home was closed to visitors during the outbreak. Plans were in place for future visits, including testing, protective equipment and temperature checks. This inspection was inspected but not rated, so it does not provide an overall rating of the home or ratings for the other areas of care.
Detailed outbreak planning
The home had a COVID-19 risk assessment covering the risks identified during the outbreak and the actions to manage them.
“The provider had completed a COVID-19 risk assessment and this covered all potential risks and described actions to be taken during the outbreak” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Staff had training in putting on and removing PPE. Inspectors confirmed that PPE was being used in line with government guidance.
“Staff had completed Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) training.” from the report
Clean premises
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules and measures to improve ventilation were in place.
“At inspection the premises were observed to be clean and hygienic.” from the report
Testing arrangements
Staff and residents were being tested, with more frequent testing during the outbreak. People who tested positive were isolated.
“People undertook a PCR test every 28 days, although they were currently receiving weekly PCR tests due to the outbreak in the home” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the home’s current overall CQC rating, given that this inspection was inspected but not rated?
- 02What are the current visiting arrangements, including testing, PPE and temperature checks?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested now, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 04How does the home support residents who find isolation difficult?
- 05How are agency staff managed to reduce infection risks between different homes?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak; it did not assess the other four key questions or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 April 2021 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, October 2017
Ashdown Nursing Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the Effective rating Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 4 September 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They also reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records, and observed care and medicines being given.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines practices, clean surroundings and respectful care. People had choices, personalised care plans, activities and access to healthcare.
The Effective rating was Requires Improvement. The main issue was that mental capacity assessments and decisions made on people's behalf were not always completed consistently. The provider was no longer in breach of the regulations at this inspection.
This was a substantial improvement from the previous inspection in May 2016, when the home was rated Requires Improvement. Before that, it had been rated Inadequate and placed in special measures. Inspectors said the improvements had been sustained and embedded in practice.
Safe staffing and care
Inspectors found enough staff with the right training to meet people's needs safely. People and relatives said staff responded when help was needed.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff to safely and effectively meet peoples' needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff explained what they were doing and supported people sensitively. Inspectors saw warm relationships and respectful personal care.
“People were supported by staff that were kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, interests and life histories. People were offered choices about their routines, food and activities.
“Care was personalised and tailored to peoples' individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Improved leadership
The management team had introduced stronger leadership roles and quality checks. Inspectors found a calm, friendly atmosphere and a clear focus on improvement.
“The home was well-managed and people, relatives, staff and external professionals were complimentary about the leadership and management of the home.” from the report
Inconsistent capacity decisions
needs fixingSome mental capacity assessments covered 'all aspects of care' rather than one specific decision. Some best-interest meetings took place without a capacity assessment, and some decisions did not involve other relevant professionals.
“However, although improvements had been made there was an inconsistent approach to assessing capacity.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every mental capacity assessment relates to one specific decision?
- 02How are relatives and relevant healthcare professionals involved in best-interest decisions?
- 03What checks confirm that decisions made on behalf of residents are properly recorded and reviewed?
- 04How have staffing levels and moving and handling practices been maintained since this inspection?
- 05What has changed since the Requires Improvement rating for Effective?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 October 2017 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Ashdown Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 September 2015.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.