CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ashurst Park Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Ashurst Park Care Home was rated Requires Improvement, with risks around staffing, fire safety, medicines, dignity and management oversight.
Inspectors visited on 8 and 9 July 2021. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, reviewed care plans and checked medicines, health and safety records.
The home was rated Requires Improvement in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found fire safety arrangements were not robust, staffing was sometimes too low and medicines records were incomplete.
People did not always receive dignified, person-centred care. Activities and accessible information were limited, and quality checks had not found or corrected important problems. There were also concerns about staff skills, recruitment and the culture within the home.
There were some positive findings. Infection control was effective, people received support with food, drink and healthcare, complaints were handled properly, and end of life care followed national guidance. This was the first inspection since the service registered under the current provider, although the previous provider's rating was Good in October 2019.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was taking appropriate steps to prevent and manage infection, including during visits and possible outbreaks.
“We were assured the registered provider was preventing visitors from catching and spreading infections.” from the report
Food and clinical support
People at risk of poor nutrition or choking received specialist support, including food supplements, fortified meals and modified food or drink.
“Staff had liaised with speech and language therapists when a person was at risk of choking.” from the report
Healthcare coordination
Staff arranged medical appointments promptly and passed on information when people moved between services.
“Healthcare professionals told us staff carefully recorded each consultation and followed any treatment advice they gave.” from the report
Complaints handling
The home followed its complaints procedure and records showed that complaints were investigated, with apologies and explanations about what would be done.
“In each case, they had established what had gone wrong, apologised and told the complainant what was going to be done to put things right.” from the report
End of life care
People received end of life support based on their wishes, with family involvement and advice from the local hospice.
“People were supported at the end of their life to have a dignified death.” from the report
Fire safety
seriousStaff had been given conflicting instructions about what to do when the fire alarm sounded. Inspectors said this increased the risk of confusion and mistakes.
“This situation increased the risk of confusion and mistakes being made in keeping people safe in the event of a fire.” from the report
Staffing and response times
seriousThere were occasions when too few care staff were on duty. Inspectors saw people waiting for help, including help to use the toilet, and heard call bells ringing for more than five minutes.
“During both days of our inspection visit we saw people waiting too long for assistance.” from the report
Medicines records
seriousSeven medicines had been dispensed without being recorded in July 2021. The home could not provide records showing how quickly and fully it had responded.
“In July 2021 there were seven occasions when a medicine had been dispensed but not recorded.” from the report
Dignity and communication
seriousPeople were not always treated with dignity. Some staff could not communicate easily with people, and private care information was discussed where others could hear.
“Staff did not always promote people's dignity.” from the report
Activities and accessible information
needs fixingActivities were not consistently meaningful or organised, and menus and care information were difficult for people to read and understand.
“People were not well supported to access written information relevant to them.” from the report
Management oversight and staff culture
seriousQuality checks had not found or corrected the problems identified. Staff reported low morale and a poor culture, which inspectors linked to undignified care.
“The registered provider had failed to establish and effectively operate systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services provided.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure there are enough experienced care staff on every shift, and how quickly are call bells now answered?
- 02What new checks are in place to make sure fire instructions are consistent and staff know what to do in an emergency?
- 03How are medicines now recorded and checked, and what happens if a dose is dispensed but not recorded?
- 04How are people with dementia being helped to find their bedrooms, bathrooms and communal areas?
- 05How are activities and care plans now personalised, recorded and discussed with residents and families?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered service and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; the previous provider's Good rating was published in 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 September 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.
Every inspection of Ashurst Park Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- September 2021Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 June 2020.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.