This inspection took place on the 23 November 2017 and was unannounced. At the previous inspection of this service in October 2015 the service was rated as Good overall. We did not find any breaches of requirement at that inspection. During this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Ashwood House Limited (Ilford) is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. It is registered to provide support to a maximum of 17 people and 15 people were using the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

There were enough staff working at the service to meet people’s needs and robust staff recruitment procedures were in place. Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place. Risk assessments provided information about how to support people in a safe manner. Procedures were in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection. Medicines were managed in a safe manner.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service to determine if those needs could be met. Staff received on-going training to support them in their role. People were able to make choices for themselves and the service operated within the spirit of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People told us they enjoyed the food. People were supported to access relevant health care professionals.

People told us they were treated with respect and that staff were caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs. They were subject to regular review. People were supported to engage in various activities. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Staff and people spoke positively about the senior staff at the service. Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place which included seeking the views of people who used the service and others.

People who used this service told us that they liked the staff who supported them and that they felt safe. They told us that they did lots of activities and could choose what they wanted to do, how to spend their money and what they wanted to eat. A family member told us that they were very happy with the service their relative was receiving.

A health professional who referred people to this service told us that they felt the service was of high quality and that people who used it were supported very well and were safe.

We found that people were asked for their consent before care or treatment was provided and that the provider acted in accordance with people's wishes, for example by helping people to save their money but not controlling when and how they chose to spend it.

We found that people were provided with sufficient food and fluids to meet their needs, but that in addition people were encouraged to choose foods they would like to be supported to cook. We observed a person appearing to very much enjoy cooking their own food which they were then going to share with other people who used this service.

We found that there were effective arrangements in place for keeping people safe and that where concerns were raised these would be dealt with swiftly and comprehensively. We also found that processes were in place to ensure the environment was kept clean and that infections were controlled.

We saw that there was a system in place to encourage people to comment on their views about the support they had received and, where they wished to, to make a complaint. This system also logged all complaints and recorded how they were investigated and what actions had been taken as a result.

One person said, “Other places have treated me like a child or baby, here I have freedom.” A relative told us how her daughter had received safer and more effective support and care from the service than she had ever had from previous ones she had used.

The provider has implemented effective systems that support staff and had enabled people using the service to maximise their functioning and independence.

We spoke to the nine residents during the course of the site visit. They told us that they were happy living at Ashwood House (Ilford), because the staff and manager provide a very good service. They were particularly pleased with being involved in decisions around their care, activities, personal development and how the home should be run. People using the service all said that they felt safe living at Ashwood House (Ilford).

This inspection took place on the 23 November 2017 and was unannounced. At the previous inspection of this service in October 2015 the service was rated as Good overall. We did not find any breaches of requirement at that inspection. During this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Ashwood House Limited (Ilford) is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. It is registered to provide support to a maximum of 17 people and 15 people were using the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

There were enough staff working at the service to meet people’s needs and robust staff recruitment procedures were in place. Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place. Risk assessments provided information about how to support people in a safe manner. Procedures were in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection. Medicines were managed in a safe manner.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service to determine if those needs could be met. Staff received on-going training to support them in their role. People were able to make choices for themselves and the service operated within the spirit of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People told us they enjoyed the food. People were supported to access relevant health care professionals.

People told us they were treated with respect and that staff were caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs. They were subject to regular review. People were supported to engage in various activities. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Staff and people spoke positively about the senior staff at the service. Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place which included seeking the views of people who used the service and others.