You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 November 2018

The inspection took place on 10 and 11 October 2018 and was unannounced. It was our first inspection of this service since it was registered on 20 October 2017.

Since Charterhouse had opened a year ago there had been three different managers. The current interim registered manager told us this had had an impact on the running of the service in respect of implementation and development of the care model. A new manager had now been recruited and was on induction and had begun the process of applying to be registered.

Charterhouse is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Charterhouse accommodates up to 77 people across three separate units, each of which have separate adapted facilities. One of the units specialises in providing care to people needing re-ablement care to return home. At the time of our inspection there were 44 people living at the service.

The service is situated in a development called The Chocolate Quarter which is a complex of retirement apartments and offers people care in their own homes. The complex has a cinema, swimming pool, spa and restaurant. These are accessible to the community as well as people living in The Chocolate Quarter.

People and their relatives were very positive about the service. People told us they felt safe, well cared for and had good relationships with the staff. Relatives were complimentary about the quality of the service and the environment.

Staff were skilled, well-trained and treated people with kindness and compassion.Staff knew people well, their likes and dislikes and how to comfort them if they were upset.

The service aimed to help people remain as integrated as possible in the community, however, as a new service some aspects of this were still being developed. People’s relatives were involved in the planning of care and said staff always made time to discuss their relatives.

The service was purpose-built and aimed to have a hotel rather than care home feel. The environment was light, airy, clean and fresh. However, it may have been difficult for some people to identify their rooms as the doors to different rooms were not easily distinguished.

People received a good standard of nursing care, however, records were not always completed fully. Some needs identified on the nursing handover sheet did not have a care plan in people’s electronic records. Daily nursing tasks such as turning and fluid intake and output were not always recorded. This meant that nursing staff could not be sure people were receiving all the care they needed at the correct frequency.

The provider had a comprehensive governance system in place which looked at incidents both on a service and at a corporate level. Where shortfalls were found action had been taken.

Staff morale was good, staff told us they enjoyed their jobs and spoke positively about their colleagues and the provider

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 November 2018

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risks of abuse.

Risks to people were assessed and plans were in place to manage these.

Staff were recruited safely

Medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 16 November 2018

The service was not effective.

Care plans did not always reflect people�s assessed needs.

Nursing staff could not be sure people were supported to eat and drink enough as records of intake were not always completed.

People had access to an inhouse physiotherapist and chiropodist.

Staff were trained and supervised.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 November 2018

The service was caring.

People told us they felt cared for and had good relationships with the staff.

Spoke treated people with kindness and compassion.

Staff respected people�s privacy and dignity and supported their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 November 2018

The service was responsive.

People received person-centred care which respected their preferences.

Relatives were involved in people�s care.

People had access to activities and the community.

People received good care at the end of their lives, however care plans did not reflect this.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 November 2018

The service was well-led.

There was a comprehensive governance system in place.

Accidents, incidents and safeguardings were recorded and analysed.

Staff morale was good and staff felt well-supported.

The provider had identified future improvements for the service.