The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Chestnut Lodge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

3 Woodfield Road, Ealing, London, W5 1SL (020) 3202 0436

Provided and run by:
Viridian Housing

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

21 September 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 21 and 22 September 2016. The visit on 21 September was unannounced and we told the provider we would return on 22 September to complete the inspection.

We last inspected the service on 26 and 27 August 2016 when we found three breaches of the regulations covering risk management, treating people with dignity and respect and the provision of care and support in a person-centred way. Following our inspection, the provider sent us an action plan on 26 November 2016 and told us they would meet the regulations by the end of January 2016. At this inspection we found the provider had taken action and addressed the issues we identified.

Chestnut Lodge provides accommodation, nursing and personal care for up to 64 older people living with the experience of dementia. At the time of this inspection, 62 people were using the service.

The service has a registered manager. 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 using the service and their relatives told us people were cared for safely. Nurses and care staff were familiar with the provider’s safeguarding procedures and were able to tell us what they would do if they had any concerns about someone’s safety or wellbeing.

There were enough staff to meet people’s care needs and the provider carried out checks to make sure new staff were suitable to work with people using the service.

People using the service and their relatives told us staff were well-trained to meet people’s care needs. The staff told us they felt well supported by the provider and managers in the service. People and their relatives also told us the staff who cared for and supported them were caring and that they always treated people with respect. We saw the staff caring for people were polite and kind. They knew people well and spoke about them with genuine affection.

Managers and staff were working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty were being met.

Most people told us they enjoyed the food provided in the service.

People had access to the health care services they needed and they received the medicines they needed safely.

People using the service and their relatives told us they received the care and support they needed. Each person had a care plan that included an assessment of their health and social care needs and guidance for staff on how to meet these.

People told us the provider arranged activities and outings and most people said they enjoyed these.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission. People using the service, their visitors and staff spoke positively about the manager.

Throughout the inspection, the atmosphere in the service was open, welcoming and inclusive.

The provider had systems to monitor quality in the service and to make improvements.

26 and 27 August 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 26 and 27 August 2015. The visit on the 26 August was unannounced and we told the service we would return on 27 August to complete the inspection.

The last inspection of the service was in September 2013 when we found no breaches of legal requirements.

Chestnut Lodge is a care home that provides residential and nursing care to up to 64 older people living with dementia. When we carried out this inspection, 61 older people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager, although they were on leave at the time of this inspection. 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.

Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were not always identified and assessed, therefore strategies for reducing risk and helping keep people safe were not in place.

Some people did not always get the support and care they needed from staff when they were upset or distressed.

Staff spent a lot of time on practical tasks and physical care and there was sometimes little interaction or conversation between staff and people using the service.

It was not always possible to obtain a full picture of people’s care needs and risks or track progress as some care records were not up to date.

Some aspects of care suggested a uniform approach rather than individually tailored care.

Staff had received safeguarding training. They told us they understood how to recognise the

signs of abuse and knew what action they needed to take to ensure people were protected if they suspected they were at risk of abuse or harm.

Managers understood when a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisation application should be made and how to submit one. This helped to ensure people were safeguarded as required by the legislation. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS provides a process to make sure that providers only deprive people of their liberty in a safe and correct way, when it is in their best interests and there is no other way to look after them.

Staff supported people to keep healthy and well. They monitored people’s health and made sure they had access to healthcare services when required.

People were supported by caring staff who respected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

The provider had arrangements in place to respond appropriately to people’s concerns and complaints. Relatives told us if they had any concerns, they would speak to the managers or staff and they would be listened to.

The service was well led and promoted a culture that respected and valued each person. People, relatives and staff said the home was well run, spoke positively about the registered manager and how they ran the service in an inclusive and transparent way. People using the service and their relatives were encouraged to give feedback on the service so the provider could develop and improve the service.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service people received. The provider used this information to help them make changes and improvements where necessary.

4 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with fifteen people using the service, three relatives, nurses, care staff and volunteers working in the home and the registered manager. People using the service or their representatives told us they were happy with the standards of care provided in the home. One person said 'it's alright here, they look after me.' A visitor told us 'people are very well looked after, the staff are so kind and friendly.'

We looked at the care plans for eight people using the service. We saw the care plans detailed people's health, social and personal care needs and how identified needs would be met in the home. The plans were updated regularly and people were involved in reviewing the care they received. Where people did not have the capacity to consent to their care or treatment, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

The provider had policies and procedures for safeguarding people using the service. Care workers understood the procedures and were trained to identify possible abuse. A relative told us 'I know my [relative] is safe here, we don't have to worry.' A member of staff told us 'I'd always make sure people were safe and I'd tell someone if I had any concerns.'

There were procedures in place to monitor the quality of services provided. The provider carried out regular audits and people using the service were asked for their views on the care and support they received.

17 July 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Dignity and Nutrition

People told us what it was like to live at this home and described how they were treated by staff and their involvement in making choices about their care. They also told us about the quality and choice of food and drink available. This was because this inspection was part of a themed inspection programme to assess whether older people living in care homes are treated with dignity and respect and whether their nutritional needs are met.

The inspection team was led by a CQC inspector joined by an Expert by

Experience; people who have experience of using services and who can provide

that perspective.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us.

At the time of our visit the registered manager was covering for the regional manager and there was an acting manager in charge. The registered manager attended for part of the inspection.

People confirmed they were being well cared for and were happy living at the home. One person said 'it is quite nice here really, I would recommend it' another said they were 'being looked after well'.

Visitors confirmed the staff treated their relatives with dignity and respect. One person commented that their relative always wore their preferred style of clothes, and described staff as 'respectful and gentle in the way they speak with people'.

People confirmed they liked the food and they were offered choices. One person told us 'the meals are good' and another said 'I was a chef myself before and I cannot fault the food here'. One visitor had brought food for their relative and was pleased to be able to do this.

People told us they were safe and if they had concerns they would speak with the staff or manager. Comments included: 'I feel safe here and I can let staff know if I am worried', my children visit regularly and they never miss anything, so I am safe' and 'I tell the manager, he listens'.