CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Astbury
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were managed, the home was clean and medicines were administered and stored safely. Recruitment checks and safeguarding training were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with healthcare, nutrition, oral health and legal decision-making processes.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect and involved people and families in care planning. People were encouraged to do things for themselves where possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were person-centred and regularly reviewed. People received support with communication, relationships, activities and their end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found open and inclusive management, regular feedback from people and families, and systems to monitor quality. The home also acted on learning, including arranging extra oral health training.
What inspectors found, January 2020
St Anne's Community Services - Astbury is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was a planned inspection on 18 and 23 December 2019. One inspector spoke with two people using the home, four staff members and four family members. The inspector also reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with dignity and supported to make choices and build independence. Staff understood people's needs, supported their health and worked with other professionals.
The home had systems for medicines, complaints and quality checks. Family members said communication was good and that concerns were dealt with. The overall rating was Good, and each of the five questions was also rated Good.
The previous inspection, published on 23 June 2017, also rated the home Good. CQC said it would continue monitoring information about the home and could inspect sooner if it received concerning information.
Managing risks
Inspectors found that staff understood potential risks and knew how to reduce them. Accidents and incidents were recorded, reviewed and used to make changes.
“Risks were well managed. Staff understood potential risks and how to mitigate them.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff respected privacy and dignity and supported people to remain as independent as possible. The home adapted equipment so a person using a wheelchair could help prepare meals.
“People were supported to be independent where possible.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included important information about each person and described clear goals. Support was planned around people's communication needs, choices and interests.
“Care records were regularly reviewed. They included important information about the person and were written in a person-centred way.” from the report
Quality improvement
The home used feedback, surveys and checks to identify improvements. Inspectors noted that extra staff training had been arranged about oral health.
“There was a strong emphasis on continuous improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual risks after they move in?
- 02What training will staff caring for my relative have, and how will their skills be checked?
- 03How will you support my relative with communication, oral health and other healthcare needs?
- 04What activities, day services and opportunities to build friendships would be available to my relative?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care planning and in raising concerns?
This was a planned inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; the provider was not asked to complete a provider information return before the inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 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, June 2017
St Anne's Community Services - Astbury was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
Inspectors visited on 03 May 2017 without warning and returned on 10 May 2017 with the visit announced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff recruitment files and other records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and staffing levels were monitored. Staff had training and support, and people's health needs were followed up.
People were treated kindly and with dignity. Care was based on people's needs, preferences and communication styles. People were supported with activities and independence, while the registered manager used checks and feedback to monitor the service.
The overall rating was Good. Each of the five areas was also rated Good. The previous inspection had found problems with mental capacity assessments and best-interest records, but inspectors found these improvements had been made.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw friendly, caring interactions. Staff understood people's communication styles and treated them with dignity.
“Throughout the inspection we saw that support was delivered to people in a kind and caring way.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included detailed information about people's routines, preferences and communication. Staff used this information in day-to-day support.
“Care and support was based on people's assessed needs and preferences.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines records checked by inspectors were complete. Staffing levels were monitored according to people's activities and support needs.
“People's medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Improvements after the last inspection
The previous inspection found that some mental capacity and best-interest records were missing. Inspectors found that these areas had improved.
“During this inspection we found action had been taken and improvements had been made.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to enjoy activities linked to their interests and were encouraged to do as much as possible for themselves.
“People were supported to access a range of activities based on their personal interests.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that my relative's mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions are up to date?
- 02How do you adjust staffing when people's dependency needs change or when staff are absent?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's care plan reflects their communication style, routines and personal preferences?
- 04What activities are available that match my relative's interests, and how are their choices recorded?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a complaint, and how will it be investigated?
This was a comprehensive inspection of the overall quality of the home, covering all five CQC questions and setting ratings for each one. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 June 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 Astbury
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 March 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 Middlesbrough
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 £1,230 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“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.