Ashgate House

Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were described as unhurried and responsive during the visit.

“There were enough staff working at the service to meet people's needs.” from the report

Staff understood people's individual needs. Risk assessments were generally detailed and tailored to the people living in the home.

“Risk assessments were person centred around the needs of individuals and staff had a good understanding of people's individual needs.” from the report

People and staff spoke positively about the home. Inspectors found that the provider encouraged an open and inclusive culture.

“The provider promoted a positive culture that was open and inclusive.” from the report

Staff had safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities. Recruitment checks included references, identification and criminal records checks.

“Checks were carried out on prospective staff to help ensure they were suitable to work in a care setting.” from the report

A medicated spray was recorded as given four times in one day instead of three. Guidance for one as-needed medicine explained how to give it but not when.

“on 1 occasion, records showed a medicated spray had been given 4 times in a day when it should have only been given 3 times.” from the report

One person's choking risk assessment explained how to reduce the risk but did not say what staff should do if choking happened. Staff had received training and knew what to do.

“However, it did not include information about how to respond if the person did start choking.” from the report

There was a small difference between the money held and the amount recorded for two people. The manager said a stronger checking process would be introduced.

“for 2 people there was a small discrepancy between the amount of money held and the amount there should have been according to records.” from the report