The Chestnuts Residential Care Home is located in Wisbech close to the town centre. The home is registered to provide accommodation, support and non-nursing care for up to 23 people. At the time of our inspection there were 23 people living at the home accommodated in single occupancy rooms and one double room and is on two floors. People are free to access all areas of the home and gardens.
This unannounced inspection took place on 12 March 2015.
At our previous inspection on 29 April 2013 the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.
The home had a registered manager in post. They had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since 2010. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered managers, 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.
The registered manager had a robust recruitment process in place. This helped ensure that only staff of the right calibre and with suitable qualifications were offered employment. There was a sufficient number of suitable qualified and experienced staff working at the home.
Staff had been trained in medicines administration and safeguarding people from harm and were knowledgeable about how to ensure people’s safety. People were supported with their prescribed medicines by staff whose competency to safely administer these has been assessed regularly.
The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We found that the registered manager and staff were knowledgeable about when a request for a DoLS would be required. We found that no applications to lawfully deprive people of their liberty were required but the registered manager was aware of the action to take if this was needed. People’s ability to make decisions based on their best interests had been clearly documented to demonstrate which decisions they could make.
Staff always respected people’s dignity and privacy at all times. People’s care was provided with compassion and in a way which people really appreciated. People’s requests for assistance were responded to promptly.
People’s care records were up-to-date, held securely and were in a format which involved people as much as possible. People were supported with their hobbies and interests on a wide range of subjects.
People were supported to access a range of health care professionals. This included their allocated GP, optician, chiropodist and community nursing services. Risks to people’s health were assessed and promptly acted upon according to each person’s needs.
People were able to choose the meals they preferred. Diets appropriate to each person’s needs were provided and included soft food options, low sugar content and vegetarian meals for people who required specialist diets. There was a sufficient quantity of food and drinks available for people.
People, relatives and staff were provided with information on how to make a complaint and staff knew how to respond to any reported concerns or suggestions. Action was taken to address people’s concerns and to prevent any potential for recurrence. People were supported to access Independent Mental Capacity Advocacy (IMCA) services if they requested these services.
The registered manager had quality assurance processes and procedures, such as audits and meetings, in place to improve, if needed, the quality and safety of people’s support and care. People were supported to raise concerns or comment on the quality of their care.