You are here

Archived: The Chestnuts Nursing and Dementia Care Home

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 July 2011
Date of Publication: 29 September 2011
Inspection Report published 29 September 2011 PDF | 81.68 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 18/07/2011 and observed how people were being cared for.

Our judgement

Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the services that people received. However, the current arrangements for clinical monitoring of the service were not robust and did not always identify weaknesses or gaps related to clinical practice.

User experience

People told us that they are asked through surveys about the quality of service that they received. They told us that their relatives also contributed to this process. They also told us that they attended residents’ meetings where they talked about what goes on in the home. We spoke to some relatives who told us that they were asked about the quality of the care in the home.

Other evidence

We saw that the provider carried out monthly monitoring visits to the home and we examined the most recent reports. We found little evidence that clinical practice was monitored at these visits. This was done by the manager who did not receive clinical supervision. This needed to be addressed to ensure that clinical practice, which was a key aspect of the home’s care provision, was carried out to the highest standards.

We saw evidence that surveys were held with people and their relatives about the service and that they were mostly satisfied with the provider’s response to the feedback that came from it. We noted that the comment made by people about the home carrying a scent of urine, was substantiated during the course of our visit..

We also saw evidence that the home carried out a self-monitoring evaluation (December 2010) as part of an arrangement with its commissioning authorities, which was then used to gauge the quality of the service. Where improvements were required, we saw the actions that were set to achieve the desired outcomes.

Since the safeguarding matter that was raised in June 2011, the manager had increased her monitoring of care plans and pressure relieving equipment in the home.