Ashgale House

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 5 August 2026 (assessment visit 18 March 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   –No rating No rating

   Safe

   Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

   This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

   The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment. This was because the provider had not always assessed risks to people, in particular the risk of choking and they have not taken action to mitigate these risks in a timely manner. Medicines were also not always managed safely.

   Where restrictions were in place on people’s liberty, there was no recorded evidence that the least restrictive options had been considered.

2. Effective

   –No rating No rating

   Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

   At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

   This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

3. Caring

   –No rating No rating

   Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

   At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

   This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

4. Responsive

   –No rating No rating

   Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

   At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement.

   This meant people’s needs were not always met.

   The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care. This was because the provider had not ensured people were at the centre of their care needs and received care and support that met all their needs.

5. Well-led

   –No rating No rating

   Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

   At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

   This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

   The service was in breach of a legal regulation in relation to good governance. The provider did not have effective governance and quality assurance systems to monitor, assess and the improve the quality of the service.