Ashford House

Who the service is for

The service supports adults with a learning disability, autistic people and people with mental health needs.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 25 August 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found that the provider was working to this guidance.

People were supported by enough safely recruited staff, who had the skills and knowledge to provide effective support. Staff consistently spoke positively about training and support available to them. One told us, “The training was good and continues to be good. We get told when our training needs doing.”

People received their medicines when they needed them. We observed staff supporting people safely with their medicines in a person-centred way, in line with their support plans.

Staff understood their responsibility to safeguard people from the risk of abuse; they were knowledgeable about what concerns they would need to report and to whom. Effective risk management processes ensured risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were managed well. Relatives told us, “People were supported to manage personal risks effectively. One told us, “They are very safe, whether at Ashford or when they go out.”

Prior to moving to Ashford house people had opportunities to visit and spend time at the service as part of the assessment process. Relatives told us this process had ensured people were included in their choice to move to Ashford House. One relative told us, “We chose the right home for [loved one]. We knew what they did for them and the activities they offered.” The service ensured people were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives. People were at the centre of the planning and review of their support; this ensured they received personalised care in line with their preferences and diverse needs. Visiting health and social care professionals were consistently positive about how the service worked with them to meet people’s complex needs in a supportive and person-centred way.

People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who promoted choices in a way people understood. Staff spoke to and about people with a kind approach and respected their dignity. People’s independence was promoted by staff in all areas of their life to ensure people lived the life they wanted.

People received person-centred support from staff who showed an ongoing commitment to learning and developing their knowledge of people’s individual needs, including complex communication needs. For example, people wanted to get up at certain times and have specific routines. This ensured their days started off positively. One person said, “I like my routine – this helps my anxiety” Relatives told us managers and staff consistently sought information and worked with them and health professionals to ensure support plans reflected learning and any changes in people’s needs.

The culture of the service reflected the provider’s vision of person-centred care, choice, independence and inclusion. People were supported to be involved in developing the quality of the service andthe registered manager fostered an open culture where everyone’s thoughts and feelings were considered. The management team were supportive and approachable, and promoted a collaborative approach to continually learning and improving the service. Professionals were consistently positive about the service, and one told us, “Ashford House provides holistic and good care, that is person centred and brings happiness to people.” They also told us, “It felt welcoming and supportive.” Another told us, “Peoples input is sought all the time.”

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives. One professional described leaders as, “Professional and caring”. While another said, “They encourage people to live their lives and people are living fulfilled lives.”