CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashness Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment, effective risk plans and safe medicine systems, but some staff medicine competency checks were out of date.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and open culture, visible management and effective audits. Staff said they felt supported and could raise concerns without fear.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Ashness Lodge was rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and the home was well managed, although some medicine competency checks were out of date.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 24 October 2023. One inspector spoke with one person and two staff, including the registered manager. They observed staff and reviewed care plans, risk plans, medicine records, care notes, audits and staff records.
Inspectors found people felt safe, risks were assessed, staffing was sufficient and recruitment checks were completed. Medicines were managed safely overall, although some staff competency checks were out of date. The home was clean and staff followed infection control practices.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe and Well-led both rated Good. This inspection only looked closely at Safe and Well-led. The ratings for the other questions were carried forward from the previous inspection, which was also rated Good.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding and knew how to recognise and report abuse.
“People were safeguarded from abuse and avoidable harm.” from the report
Suitable staffing
There were enough staff, including for one-to-one support. Inspectors saw staff being patient and not rushed.
“Staff were not rushed; they were patient and had time to provide the support that was needed.” from the report
Strong management oversight
The home had a clear management structure. Audits and other checks were regular and helped identify and address concerns.
“Governance processes, for example audits, were carried out regularly, were effective and helped provide good quality care and support.” from the report
Open staff culture
Staff said they were respected, supported and able to raise concerns. People and staff were involved in the running of the home.
“Staff told us they were able to raise concerns without any fear of what might happen as a result.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, without bad smells, and saw staff following infection prevention practices.
“We observed the home environment and found it to be clean and free from any malodours.” from the report
Medicine competency checks
needs fixingSome staff checks showing they were competent to manage medicines were out of date. The manager said this would be addressed, and updated checks were sent to CQC after the inspection.
“However, some staff competency checks were out of date.” from the report
- 01Have all staff medicine competency checks now been completed and kept up to date?
- 02How do you check that risk plans remain accurate and are followed in practice?
- 03How are people and families involved in one-to-one meetings and decisions about improving the home?
- 04How do staff raise concerns, and what happens when a concern is reported?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous comprehensive inspection?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 December 2023 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, August 2018
Ashness House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some medicine and record-keeping improvements needed.
The announced inspection took place on 23 July 2018. One inspector spoke with four people, the registered manager and staff. They reviewed care files, risk assessments, staff records, medicine records, finances and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, had enough staff and were treated with kindness. Inspectors found detailed care plans, regular staff training, support for independence, activities and access to health services.
There were some areas to improve. The home did not have clear protocols for medicines given only when needed. Water temperature checks were not being recorded. Verbal complaints were not always written down, and people's wishes about end of life care had not been recorded. These points led to recommendations, not breaches.
Detailed safety planning
Risk assessments covered people's individual risks and were kept up to date. They included signs of mental health relapse and the support needed.
“Care records each contained a set of risk assessments, which were up to date, detailed and reviewed regularly.” from the report
Support for independence
Staff encouraged people to cook, shop, manage parts of their care and take part in activities as far as they could.
“The philosophy of the service was to encourage people to become as independent as possible.” from the report
Regular quality checks
The manager and an external person checked areas such as medicines, finances, care plans, staff records and safety.
“Records showed the registered manager did weekly checks on medicines, people's finances, health and safety, and accidents and incidents.” from the report
Medicines given when needed
needs fixingThe home did not have written protocols explaining why these medicines should be taken or the maximum dose. The manager said they would consult the GP and complete the protocols.
“However, the service did not have PRN medicines protocols in place which would describe the reason for taking the medicines and the maximum dosage.” from the report
Water temperature records
needs fixingWater temperature checks were not being recorded at the time of inspection. The manager said weekly checks would start immediately.
“However, water temperature checks were not being recorded.” from the report
End of life wishes
needs fixingThe home had not recorded people's wishes about end of life care during assessment and care planning. Inspectors recommended getting advice and guidance on this.
“Records showed that end of life wishes were not recorded during the initial assessment and care planning stages.” from the report
- 01What written protocols do you now use for medicines given only when needed, including the reason and maximum dose?
- 02How often are water temperatures checked, and where can we see the records?
- 03How do you make sure every verbal complaint is recorded and followed up?
- 04How do you discuss and record each person's wishes about end of life care?
- 05How will you support my relative's independence while making sure they are safe?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 August 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 Ashness Lodge
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Haringey
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. 75 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Over the time he spent with them he got to know our parents very well and became like part of the family, even joining in family celebrations.”
“Violet is a kind and positive, caring person and we are lucky and delighted to have her caring for our 96 year old grandmother.”
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.