CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Dr. Ashdown's Stockton Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, effective safeguarding, suitable medicines management and effective infection control. Risk assessments were clear, although electronic records did not always support complete recording.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report says the rating from the previous inspection was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Inspectors did observe kind and compassionate care, and people said staff treated them well.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. The report says the rating from the previous inspection was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management oversight, an open culture and action plans for improvements. Staff understood their responsibilities and worked well with other professionals.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and good leadership, but electronic care records did not fully support recording people's needs and decisions.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 26 and 27 January and 15 February 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff files and management records.
The inspection looked only at Safe and Well-led. Both areas were rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable medicines management and effective infection control. People said they felt safe, and staff were seen providing kind and compassionate care.
Risk assessments were clear, and staff understood how to reduce risks. The home also reviewed accidents and incidents to look for patterns and learn lessons. However, the electronic care record system was too limited in some areas and did not always help staff record capacity assessments, best-interest decisions and all aspects of people's care.
Clear risk management
Risk assessments explained the risks and the steps staff should take to reduce harm. Staff were familiar with these actions.
“Risk assessments were clear and readily identified how to mitigate them.” from the report
Kind and safe care
People said they felt safe, and inspectors observed staff providing care in a kind and compassionate way.
“We observed staff interact with people in a kind and compassionate manner.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found that medicines were received, stored, given and disposed of safely. There were also clear instructions for medicines given when needed.
“Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and destroyed when required.” from the report
Good leadership
The manager reviewed the service, acted on incidents and used action plans to monitor improvements. Staff described the manager as approachable.
“The registered manager maintained clear oversight of the service.” from the report
Limited electronic care records
needs fixingThe electronic care record templates did not cover everything staff needed and could not be changed. The manager was looking for a more effective system.
“The electronic care record templates didn't always offer the range needed and couldn't be modified.” from the report
Recording capacity decisions
needs fixingThe electronic records did not fully support accurate recording of capacity assessments and best-interest decisions. The manager had put paper arrangements in place while this was addressed.
“The electronic care records did not support staff to accurately record information about the completion of capacity assessments and best interest decisions.” from the report
- 01What electronic care record system are you planning to introduce, and when will it be in place?
- 02How do you make sure capacity assessments and best-interest decisions are completed and kept accurate while the electronic system is being improved?
- 03How are paper records checked and transferred into the main care records?
- 04How do you review staffing levels as people's dependency and care needs change?
- 05How do you use accidents and incidents to make changes and prevent similar events?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key-question ratings were not inspected during this visit and were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 2023 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, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with no serious risks or concerns identified.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 30 August 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care records, staff files, training, medicines and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines procedures and detailed risk assessments. The home was clean and suitable for the people living there.
People were treated with dignity and respect. Care plans reflected individual needs and choices, activities were provided, and people had access to healthcare. The previous inspection in April 2016 was also rated Good, and this inspection found that the rating should remain Good.
Enough staff and safe recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw that recruitment checks were carried out before staff were employed.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported them in a friendly, reassuring way while protecting their dignity and encouraging independence.
“We observed staff chatting to people in communal areas and engaged with them in meaningful conversation.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's needs, preferences and wishes. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
“People's care records were person-centred and demonstrated a good understanding of their individual needs.” from the report
Good leadership and quality checks
The home had regular audits, meetings and surveys. People, relatives and staff were able to give their views about the service.
“The provider regularly sought the views of people who used the service, their relatives, staff and visiting professionals through quality assurance questionnaires.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you meet my relative's particular dementia, nursing or mental health needs?
- 02How are care plans reviewed with residents and relatives, and how are changes in needs recorded?
- 03What activities and outings would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 04How would you support my relative's dietary needs, preferences, weight and hydration?
- 05How should we raise a concern or complaint, and how would it be followed up?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the overall rating remained Good from the previous inspection in 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 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 Dr. Ashdown's Stockton Lodge
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Dr. Ashdown's Stockton Lodge →
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Dr. Ashdown's Stockton Lodge →
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 October 2013.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.