CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashton Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, staffing, infection control and accidents were managed through clear systems, although one staff record did not contain a full employment history.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support based on their needs and choices, with access to food, training, healthcare and suitable activities. Not all staff had received supervision within the provider's stated timeframe, and some consent records were initially missing.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- People were treated with exceptional kindness, dignity and respect. Staff recognised people's histories, strengths and abilities and supported them to have purpose, choice and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and needs. People could join activities, use the minibus, access the community and maintain relationships, and complaints were recorded and followed up.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had committed leadership, a positive culture and regular checks on care, medicines, health and safety and records. Staff worked well as a team and with outside professionals.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 and 17 December 2019. One inspector spoke with people, staff and visiting healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Caring. People told inspectors they felt safe, were treated kindly and had good relationships with staff.
Inspectors found that people received personalised support and were encouraged to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities. Staff worked well with healthcare professionals and families were kept informed.
A few records were incomplete or not up to date. These included one employment history, some staff supervision records and some consent forms. The manager acted on the missing records during the inspection.
Exceptionally caring staff
People consistently described staff as kind and compassionate. Inspectors saw staff creating an inclusive atmosphere and supporting people to feel valued.
“People received an exceptionally high standard of care, from a dedicated, skilled and passionate staff team.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff used people's histories, preferences and strengths to shape their support. People were helped to build confidence and live as independently as possible.
“There was a strong, visible person centred culture.” from the report
Safe systems
Inspectors found clear arrangements for safeguarding, risk management, medicines, infection control and emergencies.
“People received safe care and treatment.” from the report
Activities and community access
People could take part in activities inside and outside the home, use the minibus and maintain contact with family and friends.
“People had opportunities to engage in a range of activities both inside and outside of the home.” from the report
Good partnership working
Healthcare and social care professionals said staff sought advice at the right time and worked collaboratively to support people's health and wellbeing.
“We received consistently positive feedback staff worked well with other professionals.” from the report
Incomplete recruitment record
minorOne staff file did not include a full employment history. The manager acted immediately to address this during the inspection.
“However, we found one staff members record did not contain a full employment history.” from the report
Supervision was not always on time
needs fixingRecords showed that not all staff received supervision within the provider's stated timeframe. Staff said they could ask for support when needed.
“Records of staff supervision demonstrated that not all staff received supervision within the provider's specified timeframe.” from the report
Some consent records were missing
needs fixingSome people's signed consent records were not in their files at first. The manager completed this work by the second day of the inspection.
“However, some people's records were not available in their files.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every staff member receives supervision within the required timeframe?
- 02How do you check that every recruitment file contains a complete employment history and all required checks?
- 03How are consent forms kept complete and up to date in each person's care records?
- 04What activities and community outings are currently available, including use of the minibus?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned games room and lounge redecoration?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and was the first inspection after the service's legal entity changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 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.
Every inspection of Ashton Manor
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 December 2018.
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.