Ardent Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

The provider had failed to ensure the premises were properly maintained. People told us they felt safe and were happy with the care and support they received. People were protected from avoidable harm and abuse. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Recruitment processes ensured new staff were suitable for their role. Staff enjoyed their job roles and felt supported by the registered manager and had the skills to meet people’s needs. People received their medicines as prescribed. Risks to people were assessed and known. Staff knew people’s dietary and health needs and provided appropriate care and support. Staff followed safe infection prevention and control practices.

This service scored 72 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us they felt cared for and safe living at Ardent Residential Home. Comments included, “Yes. I’m safe here, the staff are nice and I’m happy”.” Yes, I’m fine” and “Yes, I do, no concerns”.

Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe. Staff told us they had received safeguarding training and would feel confident to raise any concerns with the registered manager. One member of staff said, “If I witnessed anything or had any concerns, I would report it straight to the manager, I would report to CQC if I thought no action was taken and I know there are signs around the home with that kind of information.”

People told us they felt safe, and this was clear from our observations. Staff spoke kindly to people. The atmosphere of the home was calm, and people felt relaxed in the company of staff. Staff took time to listen to people, which enabled people to share any concerns. One member of staff said, "You can certainly spend time with people and that is what is so nice about this sort of environment, you can help people feel more settled and put people at ease if they have any concerns.”

Staff understood safeguarding and how to report any concerns. Safeguarding concerns were appropriately reported to the local authority safeguarding team and the registered manager worked with them to ensure any issues were properly addressed. People can only be deprived of their liberty when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). In care homes this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Some people living at the service were deprived of their liberty in order to support them to remain safe. Where this was the case we found the appropriate legal authorisations were in place.

People told us they felt safe with the staff who supported them and said they thought they had the skills and knowledge to care for them safely. People and their relatives told us they felt involved with their care and treatment and the development of their care plan.

Staff told us information about a person’s risk could be found in the care plan and risk assessment. One member of staff explained, “Care plans are kept in the office and risk assessments are being updated. We have one [person] who is at a high risk of falls so a falls risk assessment is in place. We have now put in a sensor mat and then a risk assessment for was put in place.”

The atmosphere within the home was relaxed and friendly. We observed positive interactions between staff and people and staff knew people's needs well. People’s walking aids were left within reach and staff reminded people who needed walking aids to use them to support their safety. Where people chose to spend time in their rooms, we observed staff went in to check on them regularly. Staff were present in the communal areas to be on hand if people needed support.

We found the newly registered manager was reviewing all care plans and updating where required to ensure people’s risks were known to staff and care was delivered safely. People’s care records had current information in relation to people's known risks such as dietary needs and use of equipment. We observed staff delivering care safely and using equipment when required. The registered manager had implemented a system to audit and update the care records regularly to ensure they remained reflective of people’s needs. Care records evidenced people's or their family involvement in managing people's individual risks.

People told us equipment was used to support them to mobilise safely when needed.

The registered manager and staff team understood their responsibility to keep people safe. They used equipment when needed to mobilise people safely or to protect people's skin.

We toured Ardent Residential Care Home with the registered manager and found some areas of the service needed significant attention. For example, peeling paintwork at the main entrance, plaster work damage to the front stairs, threadbare and stained carpets which needed replacing. Banister rails had areas of chipped paint and the corridor walls needed repair and redecoration. Some bedrooms did not look homely and the bedding looked old and worn. We saw people had access to the right equipment to mobilise safely around the building.

We cannot be assured the service is doing all that is reasonably practicable to mitigate risks to the people using the service in relation to the environment. During the assessment we found several concerns regarding the general state of disrepair to the premises. The registered manager told us they did not have an improvement plan in place at the time of the assessment in relation to the building maintenance. We found works that was due to be carried out following previous inspections not fully completed. The electrical safety certificate (2022) identified areas that needed immediate attention however during the site inspection of February 2024 these had not been completed. At our inspection in March 2023, we found a breach of the regulation relating to premises and equipment. This was because the provider had not ensured the premises, used by people, were suitably decorated and had the necessary adaptive equipment to improve people's quality of life and promote their wellbeing. At this assessment we found actions from previous inspections had not been addressed. The failure to ensure the premises suitable for the purpose for which they are used and properly maintained, was a continued breach of the regulation relating to premises and equipment.

People confirmed there were enough staff available to meet their care needs and said call bells were answered promptly. Comments included, "They do come promptly if I ring the bell ”. And, [Staff] answer call bell quickly, nothing is too much trouble for them. I can’t fault them at all”. People and their relatives said staff were knowledgeable and well trained.

The staff spoke positively about access to training, and support from the registered manager. One member of staff said, "I did training but I also did shadowing with a team leader or a senior carer, they are teaching me well. When I first started I was introduced to all the residents, I think my relationship with them is good and they know me ." Staff told us there were enough staff available to meet people's needs and they received supervisions and had regular meetings with the registered manager.

We observed staff were busy however, we saw people were attended to quickly when they needed support and the service was calm.

Staff had been recruited safely. Checks were completed for new staff before they started to work at the service. This included employment history, references from previous employers and Disclosure and Barring (DBS) checks. DBS checks provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff received training which included mandatory training in all key areas such as moving and handling, infection control and safeguarding. Staff told us the training was good and they felt well supported in their role. The registered manager carried out competency assessments to check staff's knowledge and identify any additional training needs.

People told us staff wore PPE including gloves and aprons for personal care or when needed. People told us the service was clean and tidy comments included, “Yes, it’s clean, the cleaner is up in my room now” and “I’m happy with my room – it’s clean and tidy.

Staff told us and our observations confirmed staff had access to sufficient PPE. One member of staff said, “We have PPE which includes masks, gloves and aprons and we have disposable caps. We have different colours for the kitchen & dining room, personal care and there are all different colour cloths as well. The cleaner also cleans the rooms everywhere and the touch points like switches and anything that is accessible to hand is cleaned to prevent the spread of infection.” Another member of staff said, “We have all our PPE and gloves and aprons, I suppose if we had an outbreak you would inform resident that they have an infection that is really contagious and we would put signage on their door and ensure PPE is available outside their room and ensure yellow bins and washing bags are put in their rooms and inform family and other relevant people if needed.”

We observed staff wore gloves & aprons when needed and the home was clean and tidy.

We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely. We were assured that the provider was responding effectively to risks and signs of infection. We were assured that the provider was promoting safety through the layout and hygiene practices of the premises.

People and their relatives confirmed staff gave medicines as prescribed. One person said, "I’ve got a bad headache and [staff] are going to get me a paracetamol”. A relative said, "Staff make sure mum has her pills on time, i have no concerns with her medicines."

The registered manager and staff were able to explain the medication administration processes and systems used within the home. For example, competency checks and regular audits of medicines. One member of staff said, "I have time to focus and do my medication round properly. I have had medication training and I did my competencies and I check all the staff as well. [Registered manager] is responsible for auditing the medication.” Staff recorded when people’s medicines were administered and records demonstrated people received their medicines as prescribed.

Systems and processes had been established by the registered manager to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s medicines and use. (PRN) as required medicine protocols were in place for staff to refer to. Systems were in place for receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medicines and there were audits in place to identify any concerns.