CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chadwell House Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, risk management, medicines, infection control and learning from accidents were all found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, good quality monitoring and an open culture. People, relatives and staff were involved and felt listened to.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Chadwell House Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe care and strong management, with a few minor repairs still being completed.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 22 November 2023. Inspectors looked at Safe and Well-led. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, maintenance records and management records. They also spoke with staff and relatives and observed care.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably skilled staff, safe recruitment, appropriate safeguarding systems and safe medicines procedures. They also found that risks, accidents, infection control and emergency arrangements were being managed.
Inspectors found an open and positive culture. People and relatives said staff and managers were friendly, approachable and supportive. The overall Good rating also used ratings from the previous inspection for the areas not examined this time.
Safe staffing
There were enough staff with suitable experience and skills to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were completed before staff started work.
“The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and given by trained staff whose competence was checked. Electronic records and regular audits were used to identify gaps or mistakes.
“We reviewed MARs and saw evidence that people received their medicines as prescribed, and 'when required' (known as PRN medicines) were given as needed.” from the report
Positive culture
People and relatives described staff and managers as friendly, welcoming and approachable. Inspectors found that care was centred on people's needs and choices.
“The management team had developed a very positive culture which placed people at the centre of the service.” from the report
Involvement and feedback
People, relatives and staff had opportunities to give their views through meetings and other communications. Inspectors found that feedback was recorded and acted on.
“Items discussed included activities, entertainment and food menus and minutes of the meetings showed people's feedback was being noted and listened to.” from the report
Minor repairs
minorAudits had identified a small number of minor repairs to the premises and equipment. The report says the maintenance team was completing this work.
“Recent premises and equipment audits had identified few minor repairs were needed.” from the report
- 01What were the minor repairs identified in the premises and equipment audits, and have they all now been completed?
- 02How often are medicines records audited, and how are any gaps or mistakes followed up?
- 03What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous inspection?
- 04How are relatives involved in best-interest decisions and reviews of people's care?
- 05How does the home use feedback from people, relatives and staff to make changes?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection published on 6 November 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 December 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Chadwell House Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with only minor management improvements needed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 October 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also observed care and checked care records, staff files, medicines, staffing, menus, safety records and audits.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines practices, kind staff, personalised care plans, varied activities and good links with health and social care services.
The home was rated Good at the previous inspection in February 2016 and remained Good at this inspection. The report identified some areas for improvement, including making the registered manager more available to staff and creating an action plan after each quality survey.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors also observed compassionate and patient interactions.
“People using the service and their relatives told us staff were kind, caring and treated them with respect.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Inspectors also found enough skilled staff to meet people's needs.
“We found that medicines were stored safely and that records, including Medicines Administration Record (MAR) sheets, were completed accurately and in full.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and were reviewed when those needs changed. Staff knew people's preferences, histories and sources of anxiety.
“Each person had a care plan which was based on their assessed needs and provided guidance for staff on how to support them.” from the report
Activities and end-of-life care
People took part in activities and outings. Staff supported people at the end of life to have a comfortable and dignified death.
“The registered manager and care staff supported people at the end of their life to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.” from the report
Manager availability
minorOne staff member felt the registered manager could be more available to support staff. Inspectors gave this feedback to the manager.
“However, one member of staff said the registered manager was new and there was room for improvement by being more available to support them.” from the report
Survey follow-up
minorThe 2018 quality survey had not yet been completed and returned. The manager knew an action plan was needed after each survey so people's views could lead to improvements.
“The registered manager was aware that they needed to develop an action plan after each quality survey so that people and their relatives' views would inform the quality of the service.” from the report
- 01How available is the registered manager to support staff, and what has changed since the inspection?
- 02What action plan was created after the 2018 quality survey, and which improvements have been completed?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or risks change?
- 04How do you make sure medicines records remain accurate and complete?
- 05What activities and outings are currently available for people with different interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC areas, including care, accommodation, staffing, records, medicines and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 November 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Chadwell House Residential Care Home
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Chadwell House Residential Care Home →
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Chadwell House Residential Care Home →
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Redbridge
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.