Archived: Chestnuts Residential Home (Weymouth)

Updated 7 July 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on the 12 and 16 May 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection team was made up of one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included notifications the home had sent us and information received from other parties. The provider had sent us a Provider Information Record (PIR). A PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During our inspection we observed care practices, spoke with ten people living in the home, four visiting relatives and six members of staff, the registered manager and owner. We also looked at three people’s care records, and reviewed records relating to the running of the service. This included staff files and training records; rotas; quality assurance survey responses; and accident and incident forms.

We also spoke with three visiting health professionals and a social care professional who had knowledge of the home.

Updated 7 July 2017

Chestnuts Residential Home (Weymouth) is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 13 people in a residential area of Weymouth. At the time of our inspection there were 12 older people living in the home.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. They had been managing the service for many years. 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.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service mostly supported this practice. Some best interest decisions had been made but not recorded. The registered manager and senior staff began to address this during our inspection.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for when people did not have the mental capacity to consent to living in the home to receive the care they needed.

People felt safe. They were protected from harm because staff understood the risks people faced and how to reduce these risks. They also knew how to identify and respond to abuse.

People had support and care when they needed it from staff who had been safely recruited. They told us they were engaged with activities that reflected their preferences, including individual and group activities. People also told us they saw health care professionals when necessary and were supported to maintain their health by staff. People’s needs related to on going healthcare and health emergencies were met and recorded. People received their medicines as they were prescribed.

Staff were consistent in their knowledge of people’s care needs and spoke confidently about the support people needed to meet these needs. They told us they felt supported in their roles and had taken training that provided them with the necessary knowledge and skills. There was a plan in place to ensure staff received refresher training as deemed necessary by the provider. Where staff were due training this was scheduled.

Staff kept accurate records about the care they provided. These were not stored securely during our inspection. The owner assured us this would be rectified immediately.

Quality assurance had led to improvements being made and people, relatives and staff were invited to contribute their views to this process. Staff, relatives and people spoke positively about the management and staff team as a whole.

People were positive about the care they received from the home and told us the staff were kind and caring. Staff were cheerful and treated everyone with respect and kindness throughout our inspection.

.