CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashwood Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection safely. They checked PPE, testing, isolation, cleaning, visits and social distancing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 thematic review.
Inspectors visited the home on 12 November 2020. The visit was announced and formed part of a CQC review of infection prevention and control in care homes during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included checks at the entrance, hand-washing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, testing, safe isolation and social distancing. The home was clean and staff had extra training in infection prevention and control.
People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through safe visits, phone calls and video calls. Activities continued in small groups or one-to-one. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall quality rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had strong arrangements to prevent and manage infections. Staff used PPE, followed hygiene procedures and received extra training.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Testing and isolation
Staff were tested weekly and people monthly, with testing also available when people had symptoms. New admissions were tested and supported to isolate.
“Staff were tested weekly and people were tested monthly for COVID-19, or if they displayed symptoms.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home supported safe visits and helped people keep in touch through phone and video calls.
“People were supported to have friends and family visit them safely.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and saw thorough cleaning schedules in place.
“The home was clean throughout and thorough cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention, PPE and cleaning arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are residents and staff tested, and what happens if someone has symptoms or tests positive?
- 03How are visits currently arranged, and was the planned permanent visitors room introduced?
- 04How are activities organised so residents can take part safely?
- 05Which parts of care have been assessed in a more recent full inspection?
This was an announced thematic inspection focused on infection prevention and control under Safe; the other questions were not assessed and the service was not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 November 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, February 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found enough staff and effective oversight, but medicines records on the ground floor needed improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 3 January 2019. It followed concerns about staffing, staff skills, care quality and information given to CQC after a safeguarding incident.
Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care and medicines administration, and checked records, medicines processes, staffing rotas, audits and call bell response times.
The home remained rated Good for Safe and Well-led, and Good overall. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safeguarding training and regular management checks. They did find several medicines recording problems on the ground floor and made one recommendation for these processes to be reviewed and monitored.
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff available to meet people's needs safely. Staffing was based on a dependency assessment of the people living in the home.
“Based on our observations during the inspection, we saw that there were enough staff available to support people safely.” from the report
Risk management
The home recorded risks such as falls and mobility needs. It used measures such as sensor mats and recorded people's emergency evacuation needs.
“Risks to people's safety were identified and recorded.” from the report
Management checks
The home had several audits and a daily checklist. Its quality team had also completed a whole-service audit and the manager was preparing an action plan.
“There were a range of audits in place, and the registered manager maintained a daily checklist to ensure they reviewed all aspects of the service regularly.” from the report
Staff support and learning
Staff said they felt supported by the manager. The home used staff projects and mentoring to share learning and improve care.
“The registered manager encouraged staff to participate in projects, aimed at raising awareness or driving improvements in different areas of the care delivery.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingOn the ground floor, staff did not always use the correct codes or complete stock records properly. Some handwritten prescription details were not countersigned, and one pain-relief record was unclear.
“There was a risk that not all medicines could be accounted for, due to shortfalls in completing records on the ground floor.” from the report
Safeguarding information
needs fixingInformation in the home's notification about a safeguarding incident did not fully match information received from the ambulance service. The home said it would improve its notifications and communication with families.
“The information in the notification did not fully correspond to the notification received from the home regarding the same incident.” from the report
One communal lounge
minorMost areas were clean and free from smells, but inspectors noted an odour in one ground-floor lounge. Carpet replacement was planned.
“All areas were clean and apart from one lounge on the ground floor, free from odours.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines recording on the ground floor since the inspection?
- 02How do you now check that handwritten medicine details are countersigned and that medicine stock balances are accurate?
- 03What was learned from the safeguarding incident, and how will my family be kept informed if an incident happens?
- 04What action was taken about the ground-floor lounge odour and planned carpet replacement?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, and the report says the previous April 2018 ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 February 2019 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 Ashwood Care Centre
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 September 2014.
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 two hours of Wiltshire
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 £1,340 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Linet became her carer and all changed, my daughter started eating, taking her medications and more important her happiness came back.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.