CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chapel Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed through protective equipment, hand hygiene, cleaning, testing, social distancing and outbreak procedures. This was a focused check of infection prevention and control, not a full safety assessment.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 14 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control in the care home during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that staff used protective equipment, hand-cleaning points were available and enhanced cleaning took place several times a day. They were assured that the home was managing visitors, testing, social distancing, admissions and possible outbreaks appropriately.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a full rating across all five areas of care.
Protective equipment and hygiene
Staff used appropriate protective equipment, and hand-cleaning points were available throughout the home. Inspectors also saw safe hand hygiene and enhanced cleaning several times a day.
“PPE and hand sanitisation points were located throughout the home and staff had been observed to ensure they practiced safe hand hygiene.” from the report
Managing visitors
Visitors were screened for coronavirus symptoms, required to use protective equipment and asked to keep their distance. At the time, only essential visitors could enter because of the national lockdown.
“They were screened for Covid 19 symptoms on arrival and were required to wear appropriate PPE and maintain social distancing during their visit.” from the report
Keeping families in contact
The home supported contact with family and friends through window visits, video calls and telephone calls while normal visiting was restricted.
“The provider was supporting people to stay in contact with family and friends through window visits, regular video calls and telephone calls.” from the report
Wider infection controls
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for safe admissions, testing, social distancing and preventing or managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened and what protective equipment or distancing rules still apply?
- 02How do you support residents to keep in contact with family and friends if normal visits are restricted?
- 03How often are shared areas and frequently touched surfaces cleaned?
- 04What testing arrangements are in place for residents and staff?
- 05What would happen if there was an infection outbreak in the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the home was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other care areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 2021 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but activities needed improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 12 and 18 June 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, visitors, staff, managers and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment checks and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, medicines were managed properly, staff were trained, and people's health, nutrition and choices were supported.
People described staff as kind and respectful. Care plans were detailed and personalised. The home was clean and well managed, although inspectors said more meaningful activities were needed and made a recommendation about this.
Safe and clean home
People said they felt safe and the home was always clean. Inspectors found suitable safety checks, safe recruitment and effective infection control.
“People were happy with staffing levels at the home and told us the home was always clean.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Staff protected privacy and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“People liked the staff who supported them. They told us staff were kind and treated them with respect.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, risks and preferences. Staff knew how people wanted to be supported.
“Staff provided people with personalised care which reflected their needs and preferences.” from the report
Good management
The home had regular audits and checks. People, relatives and staff said managers were approachable and supportive.
“Staff and management were clear about their responsibilities and provided care which resulted in good outcomes for people.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingInspectors found that little had been provided in recent months apart from fortnightly armchair exercise. The provider said they would discuss people's wishes and arrange more activities.
“We recommend the provider ensures meaningful activities are available to people living at the home.” from the report
Some safety checks were late
needs fixingA full legionella risk assessment had not been completed for some time. Not all night staff had been observed administering medicines during the previous 12 months, although both issues were addressed shortly after the inspection.
“A full legionella risk assessment of the home had not been completed for some time.” from the report
Some communication and dementia support needed improvement
minorOne person said support with communication could be better. Inspectors also noted a lack of dementia-friendly signs, although some signs were added during the inspection and more were planned.
“We noted a lack of dementia friendly signage throughout the home.” from the report
- 01What activities are available now, and how do you match them to each person's interests?
- 02Has the full legionella risk assessment been completed, and were any further actions needed?
- 03Are all staff, including night staff, regularly checked as competent to administer medicines?
- 04What support is available for people with communication needs or dementia?
- 05How are relatives told about residents' meetings so they can take part?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection that looked at the home, the care provided and all five CQC question areas; all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 August 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 Lodge
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.