CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashington House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 22 December 2020. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control at the home, which supported five people at the time.
Inspectors found suitable controls for visitors, testing, isolation, social distancing and the use of personal protective equipment. They also found the home was clean, had enough protective equipment and had plans for dealing with outbreaks and staff shortages.
The home was marked as inspected but not rated. This means the visit checked infection control only and did not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Visitor infection controls
Visits were restricted to essential visitors, with alternative ways for people to keep in touch with relatives and friends. Essential visitors had their temperature checked, washed their hands and wore face coverings.
“There were suitably robust measures in place to help prevent or minimise the risk of relatives and friends, professionals and others who visited the care home from catching or spreading infections.” from the report
Correct use of protective equipment
Inspectors saw staff wearing protective equipment correctly in communal areas. Staff had training in infection control, protective equipment and testing people safely.
“Staff demonstrated a good understanding of recognised best IPC practices and the correct use of PPE, including donning and doffing procedures (putting on and taking off PPE).” from the report
Cleaning and laundry
The home was clean, with records showing regular cleaning of frequently touched surfaces. Inspectors also found suitable laundry arrangements.
“The care home was kept clean. Staff kept detailed records of their cleaning schedules, which included a rolling programme of continuously cleaning high touch surfaces, such as light switches, grab rails and door handles.” from the report
Regular testing
People living at the home were tested at least monthly and staff were tested weekly. Testing was also arranged promptly if symptoms appeared.
“A regular 'whole home testing' regime was in place at the care home. This ensured people living in the care home were tested at least monthly and staff were tested weekly.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are infection prevention and control checks, including cleaning audits, carried out now?
- 02How often are people living at the home and staff tested when there is a suspected infection or outbreak?
- 03How does the home currently arrange visits while reducing the risk of infection?
- 04What arrangements are in place if someone needs to self-isolate, including support to reduce loneliness?
- 05Do any staff now work across more than one care setting, and how is this risk managed?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 January 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, May 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but communication aids and access to complaints information needed updating.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 May 2019. One inspector spoke with two people, staff and the registered manager, and received feedback from a relative and a healthcare professional. The inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training records and quality checks. Observation was also used because some people could not communicate verbally.
The home supported five people at the time, with space for up to six. Inspectors found that people were safe, had suitable risk assessments, received their medicines safely and were supported by trained staff. People had access to healthcare, support with meals and activities, and care that respected their privacy, choices and independence.
Care records were person-centred and staff understood people's communication through body language. However, some communication aids were too small or unclear, and the feedback survey used complicated language without pictures. The home also needed to display its easy-read complaints procedure. The manager agreed to address these points immediately.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same as the previous inspection on 9 December 2016. A Good rating means inspectors found that legal requirements were met and that people received consistently good care, although improvements could still be needed.
Safe risk planning
People had detailed risk assessments covering daily activities, personal care, nutrition, health needs, community activities and holidays.
“People's risk management plans were comprehensive and provided details about the potential risks to people and the guidance for staff on how to mitigate the risks to people.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw positive relationships between people and staff. Staff respected privacy, dignity, choices and cultural and religious needs.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's preferences, histories, goals and support needs. Families and people were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“People's care records were robust and person centred. Information was available regarding people's likes and dislikes, personal histories, activity preferences and goals.” from the report
Good access to activities
People were supported with activities at home and in the community, including swimming, music therapy, massage and trips out.
“Records showed that people were provided with a number of in-house activities as well as activities in the community, including swimming, music therapy, massage, sensory and trips out.” from the report
Strong management
The manager and staff worked together, shared information and used audits to identify and act on issues.
“Systems were in place to ensure effective communication between the staff team.” from the report
Communication aids needed updating
needs fixingSome pictorial communication aids were too small or unclear. The feedback survey also used complicated language and did not include pictures, which could make it harder for people to give their views.
“Although staff used pictorial images to support people to make informed choices about their daily activities and food menu, these were sometimes small and unclear.” from the report
Complaints information was not available
minorThe home had an easy-read complaints procedure, but people did not have access to it at the time of the inspection. The manager said it would be displayed in communal areas.
“We were shown an easy to read complaints procedure, but people did not have access to it.” from the report
- 01Have the communication aids been updated so that pictures are clear and large enough for each person to use?
- 02How do you help people understand and complete feedback when they communicate through body language or vocal sounds?
- 03Where is the easy-to-read complaints procedure now displayed, and how are people supported to use it?
- 04How are people's DoLS applications followed up while the local authority's confirmation is outstanding?
- 05How do you make sure each person's care plan remains up to date when their support needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole care home and covered all five key questions, with ratings remaining Good in every area. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 May 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 Ashington House
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015Goodstayed GoodSafe: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Thames
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 £1,260 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“We cannot speak highly enough of the care that Angelique gave, and would recommend her to anyone else needing a live-in carer.”
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.