CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chesterwood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risk assessments, safeguarding arrangements, accident reviews, staffing, recruitment checks and medicine systems were found to be suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training and support, and people received help with meals, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions, and their preferences, spiritual needs and independence were recorded and supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported with individual goals, communication needs, activities, education, work, holidays and community links.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff described approachable management and a supportive team. Regular audits, meetings, feedback and quality checks were in place.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Chesterwood was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was a planned inspection on 6 March 2019. One inspector reviewed information held by CQC, spoke with three people, the registered manager and two staff, and checked care records and staff files.
The home supported five people with acquired brain injuries. People said they felt safe and were happy with their care. Inspectors found suitable staffing, trained staff, safe medicine arrangements, up-to-date risk assessments and clean, safe premises.
Inspectors also found that people were treated with dignity, supported to make choices and encouraged to be independent. Care was personalised, with support for activities, education, holidays and community life. The home had effective checks on quality and complaints arrangements.
The home was rated Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It was also Good at the previous inspection in April 2016, so all ratings remained unchanged.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were managed, incidents were reviewed and medicines were recorded accurately. The home also had checks for safety, infection control, fire safety and equipment.
“Medicine administration records (MARs) were accurate, up to date and regularly audited.” from the report
Respect and independence
People were treated with dignity and supported to make choices and do as much for themselves as possible.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised activities
People had individual goals and regular plans for activities. Staff supported them to attend events, education, volunteering, holidays and community activities.
“People were protected from social isolation.” from the report
Supportive leadership
Staff said managers were approachable and that they could raise concerns. Audits, meetings and feedback systems were used to monitor quality.
“Regular audits were carried out to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and support my relative's particular acquired brain injury needs?
- 02How are medicines checked and what would happen if a dose was missed or refused?
- 03How will you support my relative to build independence and work towards individual goals?
- 04What activities, education, work or community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How are people and families encouraged to raise complaints, and how are concerns recorded and answered?
This was a planned inspection that looked at the care, premises and all five CQC questions; all ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 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 Chesterwood
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
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.