Working at The Laurels
209 Faversham Road, Ashford, TN24 9AF
Operated by Caretech Community Services (No.2) Limited
6 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
5.8/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 9 February 2026
Score: 5.8/10
Key Finding
"Staff receive specialist training, regular supervision and work in a positive culture with enough staff, although management audits missed safety issues."
Safety & Risk
6/10
✓
Restrictors, intended to limit the opening windows, were not fitted to one first floor window... there was a build-up of staining and dirt on the outside of the toilet and on bedroom door handles... shortfalls we found were addressed during our inspection.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
People and staff spoke of a positive culture... Staff were proud to work at the service and of the support people received.
Staffing Levels
6/10
✓
There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs... agency staff were not used.
Training & Dev
7/10
✓
Staff were provided with specialist training to effectively care for them. For example, staff had received training in epilepsy, mental health and behaviours that challenge... received regular supervision and an annual appraisal.
Management
4/10
!
Audits and quality assurance processes had not identified or acted on these issues as was their intended purpose; environmental audits had not identified the concerns found during this inspection.
Programmes
6/10
✓
People chose activities mainly outside of the service in the local community. These included going to various day centres, trips to the shops, the local pub, bowling and watching football matches. People were supported to travel, some having been on holiday to Turkey, Amsterdam and New York.
Points to consider
Managers audits missed safety issues like a missing window restrictor and dirt build-up on handles, so oversight is not strong enough for top marks.
audits had not identified the concerns found during this inspection; in terms of a missing window restrictor and cleaning which was not always fully effective.
No activities coordinator or specialist programmes mentioned, so the role involves mostly supporting routine community outings rather than varied in-house creativity.
People chose activities mainly outside of the service in the local community. These included going to various day centres, trips to the shops, the local pub, bowling and watching football matches.
Staffing levels are enough to meet needs with no agency use, but no evidence of extra staff for unhurried personalised care or long team stability.
There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs... Staff told us there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staffing was more than people's one to one support hours... agency staff were not used.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: October 2019
Good
Safe
✓
Good
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Requires improvement
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