Working at Edward House Care Home
7 Cottenham Road, London, E17 6RP
Operated by Ashley House Care Homes Limited
3 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
7.0/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 9 February 2026
Score: 7.0/10
Key Finding
"Supportive management inspires a positive culture where staff feel valued and safe, although adequate staffing lacks strong retention and training is only standard."
Safety & Risk
8/10
✓
Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from potential abuse... Staff had completed safeguarding training and were able to explain the potential signs of abuse and the procedures they needed to follow.
Staff Culture
8/10
✓
Staff were positive about working at Edward House and told us they appreciated the support, encouragement they received from the management. Staff told us they felt valued, respected and supported in their role.
Staffing Levels
6/10
✓
The service manager told us people's dependency levels were assessed regularly to ensure there were enough staff to meet everyone's needs. People said there were enough staff to support them.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff told us that the induction process was useful and involved training as well as shadowing... Staff told us, and records showed that they were provided with the training they needed to support people effectively.
Management
8/10
✓
Staff told us the registered manager was supportive. One staff member commented, '[Registered manager] is a great manager who is focussed on achieving the company goals and targets with managing his staff as a leader. He inspires his staff and motivates us.'
Programmes
6/10
✓
Everyone had an individualised activity programme and people told us they liked going on trips out of the home. Staff supported people to carry out activities and encouraged them to maintain links with the community.
Points to consider
Staffing is adequate to meet needs but nothing special, with no details on long team retention or minimal agency use.
People said there were enough staff to support them.
Only standard training like induction and supervisions, no specialist courses or funded qualifications.
Staff told us, and records showed that they were provided with the training they needed to support people effectively.
Activity programmes are individualised with trips and community links, but no dedicated coordinator or special innovative approaches.
Everyone had an individualised activity programme and people told us they liked going on trips out of the home.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: March 2020
Good
Safe
✓
Good
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Good
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews