CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chilton Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Chilton Care Centre was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements.
Inspectors visited the home on 10 February 2021. The visit was announced and targeted. It checked infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, shielding, admissions, testing and outbreaks safely. They were also assured that staff used PPE correctly and that the home had up-to-date infection control procedures.
The home had enough PPE, stored it hygienically, and provided hand-washing facilities and alcohol gel. Staff, including catering and housekeeping staff, had received infection control training.
This inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was marked 'Inspected but not rated', so this report is not a full assessment of every aspect of care.
PPE use
Staff, contractors and visitors used suitable PPE. Staff followed national guidance on using and disposing of it.
“All staff, contractors and visitors used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
PPE supplies
The home had enough PPE and stored it hygienically. Hand-washing facilities and alcohol gel were available.
“The home had sufficient supplies of appropriate PPE which was stored hygienically.” from the report
Staff training
All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff, had completed infection prevention and control training.
“All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home's infection prevention and control policy and procedures were up to date.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy and associated procedures were up to date.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have the infection prevention and control arrangements described in the report been maintained since the inspection?
- 02How do you currently manage visitors, social distancing and shielding when needed?
- 03How often do staff receive infection prevention and control training, including training on PPE?
- 04How do you test people using the service and staff, and what happens if there is a suspected outbreak?
- 05What ratings or inspection information is available for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide an overall rating or ratings for the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with some minor recording and environment issues to monitor.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 and 23 November 2017. The first visit was cut short because someone living in the home died. Inspectors returned to complete their work. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, person-centred care plans, kind staff and good systems for listening to people and improving the service.
There were no legal breaches. Inspectors did note a small number of gaps in recording creams, worn curtains, wires on a floor in an unused lounge and a cupboard that was not secure. The home had plans or took action to address these points.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels reflected people's needs and saw staff respond promptly to call bells and requests for help.
“We observed staff responded promptly to people's call bells and concluded there were sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as caring. Inspectors saw staff knock before entering rooms and protect people's privacy and dignity.
“Without exception, everyone we spoke with told us staff were very caring.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to choose where to spend time, what to eat and what to do. They encouraged people to do what they could for themselves.
“Throughout our inspection people were given choices about where they wanted to be in the home, what they wanted to eat and what they wanted to do.” from the report
Good communication with families
Relatives said staff kept them informed about changes and involved them in care decisions. Staff also used diaries and handover records to share important information.
“Relatives told us the staff communicated with them and were complimentary about how the staff kept them informed about their family members.” from the report
Active oversight
The manager and regional manager carried out audits and tracked actions. Surveys and meetings were used to involve people, relatives and staff.
“The provider had arrangements in place to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service.” from the report
Creams were not always recorded
needs fixingInspectors found a small number of gaps in records showing when topical creams had been applied. The manager agreed to address this with staff.
“We checked the topical creams records and found there were a small number of gaps in the recording.” from the report
Some areas needed refurbishment
minorSome curtains were worn and marked. A refurbishment plan was in place, but the replacement curtains had not yet been fitted because decorating work was still pending.
“We noted a number of areas of the home which required improvement including the replacement of curtains which were worn with marks on them.” from the report
Wires on a floor
needs fixingInspectors saw wires on the floor in a downstairs lounge while staff were preparing for Christmas. Staff said people did not use that room, and improvement plans were in place.
“In one downstairs lounge we found there were wires on the floor.” from the report
Records cupboard was not secure
needs fixingA cupboard containing records on the upstairs unit was not secure because its door needed repair. The records were moved promptly to another secure cupboard.
“During our inspection we found the cupboard storing records on the upstairs unit was insecure.” from the report
More trips outside were planned
minorActivities were available, but one person said they would like to get out more. The deputy manager was aware of this and said there were plans for trips.
“One person told us whilst they were happy to chat in the home they would like to get out more.” from the report
- 01Have the gaps in recording topical creams been fully resolved, and how do you now check these records?
- 02What refurbishment work has been completed since the inspection, including replacing the worn curtains?
- 03What has been done to prevent wires or other trip risks being left on floors?
- 04Has the secure storage problem for care records been permanently repaired?
- 05How often are trips outside arranged for people who want to go out more?
This was an inspection of the overall service, including the premises and care, and all five CQC questions were rated; the home does not provide nursing care. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 2018 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 Chilton Care Centre
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.