CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 5 Ashley Avenue
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, individual risk assessments and suitable infection control arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and their healthcare was well managed. Staff had relevant training and supported people with food, drink, communication and daily living skills.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood people's preferences and communication methods, but this rating had fallen from Outstanding at the previous inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were individual and people and their families were involved in reviews. People were supported to take part in activities, keep in touch with others and use information in ways they could understand.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective quality checks, open communication and clear oversight from the provider and management team. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views and suggestions were acted on.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Blythson Limited - 5 Ashley Avenue was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the caring rating falling from Outstanding to Good.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 31 December 2019. One inspector spoke with two people and five staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was supporting three people with learning disabilities and personal care needs. Inspectors found people felt safe, were treated with dignity and respect, and were supported to make choices, develop skills and take part in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating stayed Good, matching the previous inspection published in January 2017.
Inspectors found that medicines, staffing, safeguarding, healthcare and quality checks were managed well. They also found that the home was not supporting anyone at the end of their life, although some end of life plans had been discussed and recorded.
Safe medicines
Medicine records were complete and accurate. Staff were trained and their competence was checked regularly.
“People received their medicines when they needed them. Records of medicines given were complete and processes to order and dispose of medicines were well managed.” from the report
Building independence
People were supported to learn everyday skills and take positive risks. This included cooking, laundry, communication and activities such as kayaking and horse riding.
“People were supported to take positive risks to develop their independence and interests.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's backgrounds, preferences, interests and signs of anxiety or unhappiness. Staff knew people well and adapted communication to each person.
“Care plans were individual. They contained personal information about people, such as important people in their lives, where they had lived and worked, as well as their interests and hobbies.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to use the local community, visit family and friends, and take part in activities matched to their interests.
“People had developed friendships through their activities and were very much a part of the local community.” from the report
Caring rating fell
minorThe caring rating changed from Outstanding at the previous inspection to Good. Inspectors still found kind, respectful care, but this is a change families may want to understand.
“At the last inspection this key question was rated as Outstanding. At this inspection this key question is now rated as Good.” from the report
- 01How would you assess and support my relative's individual communication needs, including any gestures, pictures or easy-read information they use?
- 02How would you support my relative to develop independence and take positive risks safely?
- 03What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, and how would their preferences shape the plan?
- 04How would you involve our family in reviewing care plans and decisions about healthcare or best interests?
- 05How would you manage my relative's medicines, including any medicines needed on an 'as and when' basis?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions; the overall rating stayed Good, while the caring rating changed from Outstanding to Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 April 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, March 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found outstanding caring, with safe and well-organised support, but the home is unsuitable for people whose mobility makes stairs difficult.
This was an unannounced inspection on 31 January 2017, with short notice given because people and staff were usually out during the day. One inspector met two of the three people living there, spoke with three relatives and two care professionals, and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines, staff records and quality checks.
The home was clean and well maintained. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe recruitment, good medicines management and suitable checks for risks, fire safety and equipment. Staff understood people's communication, health needs, choices and ways of expressing anxiety.
The strongest area was caring. Inspectors saw staff being patient, gentle and respectful. People were supported to stay in touch with relatives, take part in activities, build independence and try new experiences at their own pace. Relatives gave wholly positive feedback.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good, while Caring was rated Outstanding. The report says there were no concerns at the previous inspection in October 2014.
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew how people communicated and responded calmly and gently. Inspectors saw support that was unrushed and provided at each person's pace.
“Staff treated people professionally and with respect at all times. They demonstrated kindness, patience and gentleness in their engagement” from the report
Stable and skilled staff
There was good continuity in the staff team, with enough staff on duty and training suited to people's specific needs.
“There was good staff continuity and enough staff on duty with the right knowledge and skills.” from the report
Good safety systems
The home was clean and maintained. Equipment checks, fire procedures, risk assessments and medicines systems were in place.
“The premises were clean and well maintained required servicing and checks were undertaken.” from the report
Strong management checks
The provider, manager and team leaders carried out regular audits and followed up actions to maintain and improve the service.
“A comprehensive system of assessment and monitoring of all aspects of the service was established at staff, registered manager and provider level.” from the report
Stairs and mobility
needs fixingBedrooms are on the first floor and communal areas are on the ground floor. The report says the home is unsuitable for people whose mobility problems affect their use of stairs.
“the service is unsuitable for those with mobility issues that affect their use of stairs.” from the report
Complaints access
needs fixingA complaints procedure was available, but inspectors said the people living in the home could not understand or use the easy-read version. Staff relied on recognising changes in mood, behaviour and communication instead.
“An easy read version of the complaint procedure was available to people in this and other services operated by the provider but people in this house would not be able to understand or use this.” from the report
- 01How would you check that my relative can safely use the stairs to reach their bedroom and the communal areas?
- 02How would my relative be helped to complain or show that they are unhappy if they cannot use the written complaints procedure?
- 03How would you make sure staff understand my relative's individual communication and signs of anxiety?
- 04What activities and community opportunities could you offer that match my relative's interests and abilities?
- 05How would you involve me in care reviews and decisions if my relative's needs or wishes changed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, but inspectors met two of the three people and reviewed two people's care and medicine records. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 March 2017 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 5 Ashley Avenue
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 November 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
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.