CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ayletts House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The home was clean, staff used protective equipment appropriately and infection-control measures had reduced the spread of COVID-19. Inspectors did not change the previous Good rating because they only looked at the specific concerns about infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Ayletts House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection controls had improved and the home was clean, but some laundry equipment still needed upgrading.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection after concerns about a COVID-19 outbreak and infection control. One inspector reviewed information, spoke with three staff members and sought further evidence from the provider.
At the visit, the home was clean and tidy. Staff had personal protective equipment and said they had been trained in infection control. The home had quickly introduced zoning and barrier nursing, which helped reduce the spread of infection.
The inspection did not give a new rating. The previous Safe rating was Good, but inspectors only checked the specific infection-control concerns, not the whole Safe question.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy, with cleaning schedules in place.
“When we inspected, we found the service was clean and tidy, and cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Action during outbreak
The home quickly introduced zoning and barrier nursing to reduce the spread of infection.
“These had been effective to reduce the number of people who became infected.” from the report
Protective equipment and training
Staff had access to personal protective equipment, were observed wearing it appropriately and had received infection-control training.
“Staff had access to personal protective equipment which we observed staff wearing appropriately.” from the report
Earlier cleaning shortfall
needs fixingBefore this inspection, local authority swabs showed that some areas needed to be cleaner and the cleaning system had not disinfected surfaces effectively enough.
“When the local authority visited the service, they had taken swabs of some areas which showed the service needed to be cleaner.” from the report
Laundry equipment
needs fixingThe laundry machines did not have equipment to disinfect or dispose of waste safely. The provider said this was being upgraded after the inspection.
“The washing machines in the laundry room, did not have a washer-disinfector or pulp macerator to dispose of waste.” from the report
- 01Has the laundry equipment upgrade been completed, including the washer-disinfector or pulp macerator?
- 02How are surfaces disinfected now, and how do managers check that cleaning is effective?
- 03How are clean and soiled laundry kept separate?
- 04What infection-control training have staff received since this inspection?
- 05How would the home respond if another infection outbreak occurred?
This was a targeted inspection of specific infection-control concerns within Safe; it did not assess the whole Safe question or the other key questions, and the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements at Ayletts House.
The inspection took place on 16 March 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic, focused on infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found the home was clean and hygienic. Staff had access to protective equipment, handwashing and sanitising facilities. People living there and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing, and people's temperatures were checked regularly.
The home supported people to keep in touch with their families by telephone and electronic devices. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Clean premises
Inspectors found the premises clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules covering touch points and pictorial handwashing signs.
“The premises were clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place, including for touch points.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff had access to PPE and suitable handwashing and sanitising facilities.
“Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and appropriate handwashing and sanitising facilities were available to staff.” from the report
Testing and family contact
People living at the home and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing. The home also helped people stay in contact with their families.
“People were supported to stay in touch with their families through telephone calls and electronic devices.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people and staff tested for infections now?
- 02What arrangements are currently in place for visitors and preventing infections?
- 03How does the home manage an infection outbreak?
- 04How do you make sure PPE is used safely and effectively?
- 05How are residents supported to keep in touch with their families?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection of the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 April 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 Ayletts House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 2011.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.