CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashurst Residential and Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, visiting, admissions and the management of outbreaks. The provider also had measures to reduce the effect of COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Ashurst Residential and Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, with some further development suggested.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 17 February 2022. It looked mainly at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing, managed visitors and admissions, and followed shielding and social distancing rules. People could still see loved ones and go into the community.
The home was well maintained and had plans for further work. The report gives an overall result of inspected but not rated, so it does not provide a Good, Requires Improvement or Inadequate rating.
Infection control training
Staff had received infection prevention and control training and understood how to use protective equipment safely.
“Staff had received training in Infection Prevention and Control and understood the requirements for the use of personal protective equipment to keep everyone safe.” from the report
Testing and vaccination records
The home regularly tested people and staff, and kept evidence of staff vaccinations.
“Staff and people were tested regularly for COVID-19. Evidence of completion of the required vaccinations was maintained for staff.” from the report
Visiting and community contact
People could receive visitors, go into the community and maintain contact with loved ones through outside visits.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their loved ones with the option of outside visits in a purposed outbuilding.” from the report
Maintained environment
The home was well maintained and had a programme of works to manage the environment, including planned refurbishment of an upstairs toilet.
“The home was well maintained, and a programme of works were in place to manage the environment.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorThe CQC signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not give more detail about what needed improvement.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control resources did the CQC ask the home to use, and what changes were made?
- 02How are visitors currently managed, and can residents still receive visits and go into the community?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and how are vaccination records kept up to date?
- 04What measures are in place if COVID-19 causes staffing pressures?
- 05Has the planned refurbishment of the upstairs toilet been completed?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other care questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 2022 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, January 2018
Ashurst Residential and Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor issues noted.
The inspection took place on 10 November 2017 without notice and on 11 December 2017 with notice. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, staff and visiting professionals. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records and documents about how the home was managed.
The home was clean and people were protected from abuse and avoidable risks. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems and suitable recruitment checks. Improvements had also been made since the previous inspection to reduce infection risks.
Staff were trained and supported. People were involved in decisions about their care and were treated with dignity and kindness. Care plans were personal to each person, and people were supported with health needs, food, activities and end of life care.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was rated Good at the previous inspection in January 2016 and remained Good.
Enough staff
Inspectors found a full complement of staff during the four-week rota review. People also said staff were available when needed.
“The service had a full complement of staff on duty at all times; people we spoke with confirmed this.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and given safely. The medicine records reviewed had no gaps, and staff competency checks were carried out.
“The MARs we reviewed had no gaps in the recording of administration and we saw they were completed in line with the service policy.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as caring and kind. Inspectors saw that staff protected people's dignity and privacy and gave patient, unhurried support.
“People consistently told us the staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences, independence and support arrangements. People and their representatives were involved in planning care.
“The care files we viewed clearly documented what support the person needed and how that support would be delivered.” from the report
Improvements since the last inspection
The home had completed actions to reduce earlier infection control risks, including problems with bathrooms, toilets and clean laundry storage.
“At this inspection, we found improvements had been made and actions had been completed.” from the report
Some staff were described as negative
minorOne staff member said a couple of staff could be negative, although the same comment said people generally worked well together. Inspectors did not report this as affecting the overall rating.
“There are a couple of staff who can be quite negative, but in general people work really well together.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with replacing the older-style windows and re-carpeting the communal lounge?
- 02How do you monitor and respond when staff are described as negative?
- 03How often are medicines records and staff competency checks reviewed?
- 04How are my relative's care plan, food and health needs reviewed with them and their representatives?
- 05What activities and community access would be available for my relative?
This inspection considered all five CQC areas and gave a rating for each; the inspection was brought forward because of concerns that inspectors found to be unsubstantiated. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 January 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 Ashurst Residential and Care Home
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Ashurst Residential and Care Home →
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Ashurst Residential and Care Home →
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvement
- February 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.