During an assessment under our new approach
Chestnuts Residential Care Home is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 13 people. At the time of the visit, 12 people were living at the home.
This service supports older people, including people living with dementia and people with physical health needs.
We carried out this assessment on 08 July 2026 and 09 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support provided and told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff spoke highly about the home referring to it as ‘homely’ with comments including, “I would 100% recommend chestnuts to a loved one as it has a homely feel as soon as you walk into the front door and everyone is so happy and content”, and “I would recommend Chestnuts to others and indeed for my own family because it is a small care home, providing close personal care.” Throughout the inspection, we observed warm, respectful and unhurried interactions between staff and people using the service.
People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Staff felt well supported by leaders who were visible, approachable and engaged. Comments from staff included, “The home is very well managed and very supportive with me”, “The owner, manager, deputy manager and indeed all the staff are more like team players. The owner, manager and deputy manager are always approachable should I need to talk to them, and I have never felt that anything was too much trouble” and “Since I first started I have felt very welcome, appreciated and generally well thought of within Chestnuts.”
Care plans were in place, were person centred and covered key areas of people’s needs and risks. Care was delivered by consistent staff who knew people well with no reliance on agency staff. This consistency supported staff to recognise changes in people’s needs and respond effectively. Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. This included the homes pet Guinea pigs and external activity outings. Staff understood and managed risk while supporting people to take part in activities.
People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who promoted choices in a way people understood. Staff spoke to and about people with warmth, acknowledged their individuality and respected their dignity. Staff promoted people’s independence to ensure people lived the life they wanted. One staff member said, “They receive a wide variety of choice. I personally like to support the residents by gaining their trust and appreciation, I like to think that my natural caring nature towards them helps me to have a good communication bond with them.”
There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse and staff demonstrated a good understanding of their responsibility in reporting any concerns. One staff member said, “If there was any abuse or harm within Chestnuts, I would report it to management so that they were aware and they could act on it, safeguarding would then need to be involved. I feel that this would be dealt with in a professional manner and taken seriously.”
The home was clean, well maintained, and free from environmental hazards, with appropriate safety checks completed and equipment kept in good working order.
Medicines were managed safely, supported by effective systems to maintain robust oversight. Staff were suitably trained and they worked well with external professionals to achieve positive outcomes for people. Healthcare professionals confirmed this with comments including, “They seek assistance promptly when needed for their residents, the staff ask us for advice about residents when we are in there and contact us on the correct phone number if needed more urgently”, “They are very good at following care plans set by us, when medication arrives that we have been waiting for they always kindly inform us that it is now in the home”, “I find that they are generally good at picking up on individuals changing needs and identifying them” and “When I have made changes to management or requested observations from the care staff they are good at ensuring these changes are made.”
Staff had regular competency checks to make sure they continued to give medicines safely. The manager was aware that some of the competency checks were past the recommended one-year review period and told us that plans were in place to get these updated as soon as possible.
The provider had a good learning culture. People, their relatives and staff could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. Comments from staff included, “We document any accidents or incidents onto [electronic care records] and then report to management so they are aware of the situation. The home is always assessing ways to improve and avoid such things happening,” and “The service is always trying to improve and to make chestnuts a welcoming environment and a safe environment for everyone.”
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, 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 staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control, and freedom over their lives.