CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Chesterfield House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Risks were assessed, staffing levels were planned, medicines were managed safely and staff understood how to respond to abuse or avoidable harm.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff assessed people's needs, received training and supervision, supported healthy eating and helped people access health services. Mental capacity and least restrictive support were also considered.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives gave positive feedback about staff kindness. Staff respected privacy and dignity and involved people and families in decisions about care.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Support was highly tailored to each person. Inspectors found excellent communication plans, strong support for independence, meaningful community links and a wide range of activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had strong leadership, an open culture and systems for checking quality. People, relatives, visitors and staff were encouraged to give their views.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Chesterfield House was rated Good; inspectors found exceptionally responsive, kind care and strong support for independence.
Inspectors visited on 20 November 2019. One inspector spoke with four people, a relative, an independent advocate and four staff. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff training and quality checks.
People were described as safe, well supported and treated with kindness and respect. Staff understood people's needs in depth. They supported people to make choices, become more independent, maintain relationships and take part in community activities.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding, which means inspectors found exceptional flexibility, choice and person-centred support in this area.
Personalised care
Staff knew people's needs and life histories very well. Care was adapted to individual choices and helped people achieve greater independence.
“Staff provided care in a truly person-centred way and they had an excellent and in-depth knowledge and understanding of the diverse needs of the people they cared for.” from the report
Outstanding responsiveness
The home offered flexible support, detailed communication plans and opportunities that matched people's interests. Inspectors found this led to positive changes in wellbeing, independence and relationships.
“The service went over and above the requirements of the accessible information standard.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to take part in local projects, activities and charities. They maintained relationships and were encouraged to avoid social isolation.
“The service played an active role in the local community.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were kind and supportive. Staff protected privacy, knocked before entering bedrooms and encouraged people to do things for themselves.
“All the people we talked with gave us positive feedback about the caring nature of the service, the quality of care provided and the kindness and thoughtfulness of staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative to become more independent while managing their risks?
- 02How would you communicate with my relative if they have difficulty understanding or explaining how they feel?
- 03What activities and community opportunities could you offer that match my relative's interests?
- 04How do you maintain consistency in staffing, and what happens when there is unplanned staff sickness?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care plan reviews and decisions?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; the overall rating remained Good from the previous inspection in 2017, while Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 2020 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, June 2017
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, caring and well-organised support, with minor issues about staff language and complaints information.
Inspectors visited on 4 May 2017 after giving the home a short period of notice. They spoke with all six people living there, staff and managers, observed care, checked three care records and reviewed staffing, training and quality records.
The home was found to be clean and well maintained, with enough staff and suitable checks on risks, medicines and money. Staff supported people with meals, healthcare, personal choices and activities. People were treated with kindness, privacy and respect, and their care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed.
The home had an established manager, good teamwork and effective quality checks. Inspectors also noted two examples of inappropriate language by staff and found that the complaints information did not have up-to-date health service ombudsman contact details. The manager agreed to address both points.
The overall rating was Good, and each of the five areas was also rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 2 December 2014.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns. Risks were assessed and reviewed, including risks linked to eating, distress and road safety.
“The registered persons continued to maintain clear and effective systems to ensure potential risks to people’s safety and wellbeing had been considered and assessed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw a friendly, homely atmosphere. Staff supported privacy, dignity, contact with relatives and involvement in decisions.
“Throughout our inspection visit there was a warm, homely atmosphere and staff displayed a relaxed, friendly approach toward all of the people who lived there.” from the report
Individual support and activities
Care plans described people's wishes and needs in detail. People were supported to pursue interests, take holidays, use the community and work towards greater independence.
“The care plans for my service user are individualised, person centred and reviewed regularly to ensure they meet [the person's] needs.” from the report
Good leadership and checks
The manager and staff worked as a team, held handovers and invited people to give their views. Quality checks helped monitor care, medicines and staff skills.
“Audits undertaken by the registered manager had continued to be checked through regular support visits undertaken by the registered persons regional manager.” from the report
Staff language
needs fixingInspectors heard two examples of inappropriate language used by staff when speaking with people. They said this did not directly affect people and there was no malicious intent, but asked the manager to address it.
“During our inspection visit we observed two examples of inappropriate language being used by staff when they spoke with people.” from the report
Complaints information
minorThe complaints procedure did not contain current contact details for the health service ombudsman. The manager took immediate action to update the information.
“We noted the information did not include the up to date contact details for the health service ombudsman.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors heard inappropriate language from staff, and how is respectful communication checked now?
- 02Has the complaints procedure been updated with the correct health service ombudsman contact details?
- 03How are individual risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs or behaviour changes?
- 04How will you support my relative to build independence and take part in activities outside the home?
- 05How can my relative and family contribute to care reviews, residents' meetings and decisions about support?
This was an announced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC areas, including observations, discussions with all six people living there, three care records and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 2017 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 Chesterfield House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 April 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.