CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chapel House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, staff recruitment was safe, staffing levels met people's needs, and medicines were managed by trained and checked staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- People, relatives and health professionals were involved in care planning. Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped with healthcare, education and purposeful activities.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind, friendly, understanding and empathetic. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans gave staff guidance about people's individual needs and preferences. People had a varied choice of activities, including education, volunteering and community activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear quality checks, regular meetings and good links with health and social care professionals. Managers monitored risks and used learning from incidents to improve care.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Chapel House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches reported.
This was a planned inspection on 6 and 7 February 2019. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. Inspectors spoke with people using the service, relatives, managers and staff. They also checked care files, medicines records, staff recruitment and training records, and accident and incident records.
The home supported people who had experienced an acquired brain injury. Inspectors found that people received safe and effective care from trained staff who knew them well. Risks and medicines were managed safely, care plans were regularly reviewed, and people were involved in decisions about their care.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They had access to activities, education, volunteering and community opportunities. The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection rating was also Good.
Safe care and medicines
Risks were clearly assessed and reviewed. Medicines records were complete, and staff had regular training and competency checks.
“Medication administration records (MARs) were in place and had been fully completed.” from the report
Personalised support
People and their relatives were involved in planning care. Plans were detailed and regularly updated to reflect current needs.
“People, their relatives and health care professionals had all been fully involved in the assessment and planning of people's care” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff understood their needs and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Activities and community life
People could take part in activities they chose, as well as education, volunteering and social events.
“People had the opportunity to participate in educational training and volunteering placements within the local community.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and review my relative's needs during the first 12 weeks and after that?
- 02What activities, education or volunteering opportunities would be suitable for my relative?
- 03How do you make sure staff understand and follow my relative's risk assessments?
- 04How are medicines checked, and how often are staff assessed as competent to administer them?
- 05How would support be coordinated with health professionals and any services in the community?
This was a planned inspection of the care home and the provider's domiciliary care service, based on information held by CQC and evidence from people, relatives, staff and selected records. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 2019 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 Chapel House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 2011.
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 St. Helens
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 £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.