CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Chiltern Park House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The ward was clean, well maintained and safe. Staff assessed risks and managed medicines well, but staffing levels were below target on some shifts and some records were incomplete.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff completed thorough physical and mental health assessments and provided specialist treatments in line with national guidance. Some care plans did not fully describe the individual care provided or the person's involvement.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors saw exceptional compassion, kindness and respect. Patients were involved in their care and in decisions about the service, while families received extensive support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The service offered private, comfortable spaces, personalised meals and support for communication, advocacy, cultural and spiritual needs. Patients and families could raise concerns and said staff acted on them.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Leaders were visible and approachable. The service had strong governance, risk monitoring and audit arrangements, with a clear focus on learning and improvement.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring, but inspectors found staffing gaps and care records that needed improvement.
This was the first inspection of the service, which had opened in April 2021. Inspectors visited on 14 October 2021. They spoke with patients, relatives, staff and an advocate, observed care, toured the ward and checked records, medicines, policies and meetings.
Inspectors found a clean and safe environment. Staff assessed risks, managed medicines safely and worked to avoid restraint. Patients received specialist eating disorder treatment from a team with a wide range of skills.
The strongest area was caring. Patients said staff were kind, respectful and supportive. Families also praised the help they received. Inspectors rated Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led as Good, and Caring as Outstanding.
There were vacancies among nursing and support staff, and 15% of shifts in the previous six months were below the staffing target. Some care plans were not personalised enough, and some clinical and observation records were incomplete. Staff corrected the recording omissions during the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Patients described staff as consistently kind and caring. Inspectors found a strong culture of person-centred care, with staff responding to individual needs in creative ways.
“Staff treated patients with exceptional compassion and kindness. They respected patients’ privacy and dignity.” from the report
Strong family support
Families received support before, during and after admission and home visits. The service also offered a carers' group and an email helpline.
“Staff were very supportive of patients’ families and carers. Families spoke in glowing terms about the support they received.” from the report
Patients involved in decisions
Patients helped shape their care, the ward environment and the service. They took part in meetings and contributed to materials and staff recruitment.
“Staff encouraged patients to take responsibility for their own recovery, and actively involved patients in decisions about their care and treatment.” from the report
Specialist treatment
The service had a full range of specialist staff and offered treatments suited to people with eating disorders. Care followed national guidance.
“Staff provided a range of treatment and care for patients based on national guidance and best practice.” from the report
Safe environment
The ward was clean, well maintained and designed around the needs of people with eating disorders. Staff assessed risks and worked to minimise restrictive practices.
“The ward was safe, clean, well equipped, well furnished, well maintained and fit for purpose.” from the report
Staffing vacancies
needs fixingThere were vacancies for nursing and support staff. Some shifts were below the planned staffing level, and patients had raised concerns about staff being busy.
“In the last six months 15% of shifts were below staffing targets.” from the report
Care plans not personal enough
needs fixingCare plans did not always describe the individual care being provided or clearly record how much patients took part in planning their care.
“Not all care plans recorded whether the patients were involved in decisions about their care or the extent of their involvement.” from the report
Incomplete records
needs fixingSome electronic clinical notes and observation records were missing or incorrect. Staff investigated and corrected these omissions on the day of inspection.
“Some recent clinical notes recorded on Carenotes were incomplete or incorrect, including several day and night entries missing.” from the report
Mental Health Act rights not repeated promptly
needs fixingStaff explained the detained patient's rights at admission but did not repeat the explanation when needed. There was a 12-day delay before another attempt.
“We found staff did not make any repeated attempts to explain those rights until 12 days after the first attempt.” from the report
- 01How many nursing and support staff vacancies are there now, and how do you check that each shift is safely staffed?
- 02How do you make sure care plans describe the person's individual care and record their involvement in decisions?
- 03How do you check that clinical notes and observation records are complete on every shift?
- 04How do you make sure people detained under the Mental Health Act are reminded of their rights when needed?
- 05What changes have you made since the inspection to address the issues inspectors identified?
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the specialist eating disorder service and covered Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 December 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.
Every inspection of Chiltern Park House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 October 2020.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of Buckinghamshire
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 £1,020 to £1,300 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.