CHESTNUT RISE NURSING HOME

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has not been rated at this assessment.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to fit and proper persons.
 

We have not awarded this service a score for Safe.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Safe.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Safe key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Safe key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

The registered manager worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The registered manager shared concerns quickly and appropriately. However, we could not be assured that the provider had ensured that the appropriate level of suitability checks had been undertaken in relation to all people who spent time within the service. The provider had not assessed risks associated with this.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In [care homes/hospitals], this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that the service was working in accordance with the MCA.
 

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. People and their relatives had the opportunity to plan their care with the service so that it was in line with their needs and preferences. Records evidenced people were supported to make their wishes known and were supported in their decisions. People’s independence was promoted.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Safe key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

There were enough contracted qualified, skilled and experienced care staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Sufficient contracted numbers of staff were observed at the service to meet people’s needs and staff appeared the be knowledgeable, kind and caring. However, records did not evidence that the provider had ensured safe recruitment processes had been undertaken for all people who were involved in or spent time within the service. We could not be assured that the provider had correctly assessed risks to people or implemented suitable mitigation.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Safe key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Safe key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.