CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashley Drive
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the home’s leadership requires improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 January 2020. One inspector spoke with a person living at the home, a visiting relative, managers and four staff. Records about care, medicines, recruitment and management were also checked.
The home supported six adults with learning and physical disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported with their health, nutrition, communication, activities and choices. Staff were trained and followed people’s care plans.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because some relatives did not feel listened to and staff reported very low morale. The home was rated Good at the previous inspection in 2017.
Safe support
Inspectors found written risk assessments and regular checks to reduce the risk of injury or harm. Staff had been safely recruited and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs.
“Written risk assessments were in place to assess likely hazards and how these could be reduced.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were observed treating people with kindness, patience, dignity and respect. Relatives gave positive feedback about the care.
“People were supported by staff who demonstrated they were kind and compassionate towards them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people’s preferences and needs. People were supported with activities, faith, day opportunities and developing independence.
“People received a personalised service. Each person had a care plan in place which detailed their likes and dislikes.” from the report
Good health support
Staff worked with health professionals and followed advice about people’s changing needs, diet and monitoring.
“Where advice was given to staff following a consultation with other professionals, this was followed.” from the report
Relatives did not always feel heard
needs fixingThree relatives said they did not always feel listened to. Inspectors said records and communication about decisions concerning people’s health could be improved.
“Three relatives we spoke with told us they did not always feel listened to.” from the report
Low staff morale
needs fixingSome staff described morale as low or very low. The inspector recommended support and training for the management team on motivation and team building.
“When we did receive feedback, staff told us staff morale was "Low", "Very low", Very low, staff with high experience are leaving” from the report
Kitchen cleaning
minorThe home was generally clean, but inspectors found that the kitchen needed attention and that both fridges and freezers required cleaning.
“We observed some areas in the kitchen needed some cleaning attention. We found both fridges and freezers required cleaning.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to improve staff morale and team building since the inspection?
- 02How will you make sure relatives feel listened to when they raise concerns about a person’s health or medical attention?
- 03How are decisions about people’s health now recorded, including the checks and discussions behind those decisions?
- 04Were the kitchen fridges and freezers cleaned after the inspection, and how is cleaning now checked?
- 05How do you decide when a constant staff presence is needed in the lounge, based on each person’s risk assessment?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous overall rating was Good, but Well-led had fallen to Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 2020 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, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with a new manager awaiting registration.
This was an announced inspection on 7 June 2017. It was the first inspection since the provider registered the home. Five adults with learning disabilities or physical disabilities lived there.
The inspector observed care, including for people who could not communicate verbally. They spoke with relatives, managers, care staff and a healthcare professional. They also reviewed staff recruitment files and care plans, and checked information from other agencies.
Inspectors found people were safe and supported by trained staff. Medicines, risk assessments, safeguarding, food, healthcare and activities were managed well. Staff were kind, knew people's communication methods and supported family relationships and choices.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home did not have a registered manager during the visit because the previous manager had left, but a new manager had been recruited and had applied to register with CQC.
Kind and respectful care
Staff showed kindness and compassion. They understood how people communicated and treated them with dignity.
“People were cared for by staff who demonstrated kindness and compassion and were committed to providing support which helped people improve their health and well-being.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to choose activities indoors and in the local community, including religious activities, outings and holidays.
“People were supported to access a wide range of activities both within the home and the local area.” from the report
Clean and well-maintained home
The home was clean, tidy and in good repair. Inspectors described a relaxed and professional atmosphere.
“The home was clean, tidy and in good repair. We found there to be a relaxed and professional atmosphere.” from the report
Manager awaiting registration
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post during the inspection. A new manager had been recruited and had applied to register with CQC.
“The service did not have a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection.” from the report
Medicine stock rotation
minorThe home had identified an overstock of medicine and introduced a stock management system. Inspectors said stock rotation still needed to improve.
“We noted the stock rotation could be improved.” from the report
Delayed staff meetings
minorSome one-to-one meetings with staff had been delayed because of holidays. The provider had identified this and had an action plan.
“The support lead told us some of the one to one meetings with staff had been delayed due to holidays.” from the report
Uncertainty about openness procedure
needs fixingThe manager was initially unsure about the duty of candour process after an incident. The provider later confirmed the procedure and sent evidence of action taken.
“The manager was unsure at the time of the inspection.” from the report
- 01Has the new manager now completed their CQC registration, and who is responsible for the home if the manager is absent?
- 02What changes were made to medicine stock rotation after the inspection?
- 03How are staff one-to-one meetings and appraisals scheduled and monitored now?
- 04How would the home explain and respond to a serious incident involving a resident?
- 05How will the home continue to support the person's communication methods, activities and family relationships?
This was the first overall inspection since the provider registered the home and it assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 July 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.
Every inspection of Ashley Drive
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 May 2016.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of Buckinghamshire
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 £1,300 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.