CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Chestnut Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, risk assessments, medicines, infection control and accident monitoring were considered safe, although recording the effect of as-needed medicines had needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and people received support with food, fluids and healthcare. The home followed the Mental Capacity Act, although some information about individual fluid needs was not initially detailed enough in care plans.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors saw staff offering choices, supporting independence and respecting people's privacy, equality and cultural needs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People had activities, support to maintain relationships and communication support, while complaints were recorded and investigated.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong leadership, an open culture and effective checks on quality and safety. Managers used feedback, audits and action plans to improve the service, though some care planning details needed strengthening.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and dementia-support details needing improvement.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. It was unannounced and took place on 29 November 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, observed care, and reviewed care plans, medicines, recruitment, training and infection-control records.
Inspectors rated all five areas Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. They found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable risk assessments, kind staff, personalised care, varied activities and strong management oversight.
A few improvements were identified. The electronic medicines system did not initially record whether some as-needed medicines had worked. Some care plans did not include enough detail about fluid targets. The home also agreed to improve signs and information for people with dementia. Evidence was provided after the inspection that some of these points had been addressed.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed patient and polite interactions, with people looking comfortable and well cared for.
“People and relatives were very positive about the staff and told us they were kind, caring and respectful.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills and experience. Call bells were usually answered within three minutes, and response times had improved as staffing became more stable.
“There were sufficient staff available with the right skills and experience to meet the individual needs of people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, interests and communication needs. Staff involved people and relatives in decisions and supported people's independence.
“Care plans were person-centred and provided information about people's personal history, preferences for their care needs, likes and dislikes, interests and communication abilities.” from the report
Strong management oversight
Managers used audits, meetings, feedback and action plans to monitor the home and make improvements. Staff said they felt supported and could raise concerns.
“The provider had ensured the home was well managed and quality assurance systems were effective to monitor the safety of the home.” from the report
As-needed medicines
needs fixingAt the inspection, the electronic system did not have a suitable place to record whether as-needed medicines had worked. The manager later provided evidence that this was being recorded.
“The system did not have a suitable place for staff to record the effectiveness of PRN medicines” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingSome care plans did not initially state enough detail about individual needs, including recommended daily fluid amounts. The manager later confirmed this information would be added to care plans and handovers.
“some of the provider's care planning systems did not always contain sufficient detail about people's individual or specific needs” from the report
Dementia-friendly information
minorInspectors suggested adding more signs and information to help people with dementia understand their surroundings. The management team agreed to look at further improvements.
“we discussed with the management team if the home could be more suited to people with dementia” from the report
Communication after a fall
minorOne relative was not satisfied with the communication from the home after their family member fell. The manager said they would investigate and follow up.
“We spoke with one relative who was not satisfied with the level of communication from the home after their family member had a fall.” from the report
- 01How do you now record and review whether as-needed medicines have worked?
- 02Where can I see the person's daily fluid target and how do staff monitor it?
- 03What extra signs, calendars or information are now available for people with dementia?
- 04How will you inform us if the person has a fall or another incident?
- 05How will you involve us in reviewing the person's personalised care plan?
This was the first unannounced inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 January 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.
Every inspection of Chestnut Manor Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 September 2021.
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.