Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Ashley Court Care Home, Kettering.

Ashley Court Care Home in Kettering is a Residential home specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, caring for adults over 65 yrs, dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. The last inspection date here was 4th October 2019

Ashley Court Care Home is managed by Regal Care Trading Ltd who are also responsible for 16 other locations

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Ashley Court Care Home
      Reservoir Road
      Kettering
      NN16 9QT
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01536482777

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-10-04
    Last Published 2017-03-22

Local Authority:

    Northamptonshire

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

16th February 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Ashley Court Care Home provides care for up to 38 older people, many of whom are living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 34 people living in the home. At the last inspection, in February 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs. People were consistently protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

The care that people received continued to be effective. Staff had access to the support, supervision, training and on going professional development that they required to work effectively in their roles. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

People developed positive relationships with the staff who were caring and treated people with respect, kindness and courtesy. People had detailed personalised plans of care in place to enable staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences. People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had implemented effective systems to manage complaints.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager was a visible role model in the home. People, their relatives and other professionals told us that they had confidence in the manager’s ability to provide high quality managerial oversight and leadership to the home.

24th February 2015 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

This inspection took place on the 24 February 2015 and was unannounced. The service is registered to provide nursing and personal care to 38 older people with physical disability, dementia and sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection there were 37 people living there. The premises are purpose built and provide facilities for people with disability.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The provider had robust recruitment systems in place; which included appropriate checks on the suitability of new staff to work in the home. Staff received a thorough induction training to ensure they had the skills to fulfil their roles and responsibilities. There were enough staff available to meet their needs and there was a stable staff team.

Systems were in pace to ensure people were protected from abuse; staff had received training and were aware of their responsibilities in raising any concerns about people’s welfare. There were formal systems in place to assess people’s capacity for decision making under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Peoples’ care was planned to ensure they received the individual support that they required to maintain their health, safety, independence, mobility and nutrition. People received support that maintained their privacy and dignity and systems were in place to ensure people received their medicines as and when they required them. People had opportunities participate in the organised activities that were taking place in the home and were able to be involved in making decisions about their care.

People had confidence in the management of the home and there were robust systems in place to assess the quality of service provided. Records were maintained in good order and demonstrated that people received the care that they needed.

22nd April 2014 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

During our inspection of Ashley Court care home we set out to answer our five questions; is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

The detailed evidence supporting our summary can be read in our full report.

Is the service safe?

The service had effective recruitment procedures but we asked the provider to note that professional references give more accountability than personal ones.

Assessments included identifying any risks to people and detailing how staff should care for people to support their safety and well-being.

Is the service effective?

People spoke highly of the service. One person living in the home said “I can’t complain” and told us that staff were helpful and available when they were needed. One relative explained the “great relief to know (their relative) is being properly cared for”

Medication was being appropriately accounted for. We identified that it was not always clear whether prescription creams should be applied regularly or as needed. The manager took immediate steps to address this.

Is the service caring?

Staff had a good knowledge of people’s needs and spoke with people in a kind and caring manner. People living in the home spoke highly of the staff.

Is the service responsive?

Assessments and care plans contained a good level of detail to make sure that staff had the appropriate information to meet people’s individual needs and preferences.

People were consulted and supported to make decisions about their care. Where people were not able to make decisions for themselves decisions were made in their best interests.

Is the service well-led?

The service has a quality assurance system. Records seen by us showed that shortfalls identified via audits and other checks had been addressed.

People who used the service and their relatives were able to give feedback on the running of the home via regular satisfaction surveys. Staff were also able to give feedback so their knowledge and experience was taken into account.

You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.

31st July 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We spoke with five people who lived at Ashley Court, all were happy with the care they received. We saw that staff treated people with respect and gave explanations when assisting people. We saw that staff offered assistance promptly when people needed it.

We looked at the medication administration records. We saw that although staff signed for the majority medication given they did not sign for prescribed creams. This meant that it was not possible to determine whether creams were being administered as prescribed.

Staff told us they had regular supervision sessions and attended training to ensure that they had the skills and knowledge to do their jobs.

We saw that people using the service and their relatives had been able to give feedback about the service through regular satisfaction surveys. We looked at a selection of these and saw the feedback was positive.

 

 

Latest Additions: