Archived: Chase House

People that lived at the home were provided with choices about their day to day lives. Staff were aware of the non-verbal communication methods people used to demonstrate they were in agreement with the way their care was provided. Systems were in place to make sure that complex decisions were made in people's best interest.

People were having their health care, personal care and emotional care needs met. They received appropriate health care treatment. People took part in activities of their choice.

The home's system for managing medication meant that there could be a risk of errors occurring in the administration of people's medicines.

People were supported by staff that were trained. Staff were not receiving formal supervision and an appraisal system was not in place.

The home had some systems in place for checking the quality of care people received. Records were not always kept of the checks that were completed.

We found that the service manager had completed mental capacity assessments for each person, in line with legal requirements. Although people were unable to be involved in formal decisions about their care, they were supported to take part in daily tasks in the home, including meal preparation and cleaning.

We saw that care plans were personalised and based on comprehensive assessments of people's needs. They provided clear guidelines for care workers to follow when they supported people. Risk assessments were thorough and because risks were managed, the people who lived at Chase House were able to take part in a range of indoor and outdoor activities.

We saw that Chase Community Homes had taken action to safeguard people against the risks of abuse through safe recruitment policies and the provision of appropriate training for staff. We observed enough experienced staff on duty to meet people's needs. We found effective systems in place to protect vulnerable people and reduce the risks of unsafe care.