CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Chrislyn House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visiting, testing, admissions, social distancing, cleaning and managing outbreaks. They recommended improvements to PPE areas and remedial work to two communal bathrooms.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Chrislyn House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, with improvements needed to PPE areas and two communal bathrooms.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 11 March 2021. It checked infection prevention and control because of COVID-19 outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors were assured that visitors, residents and staff were protected through testing, personal protective equipment, hand sanitising, social distancing, cleaning and updated infection control guidance.
They recommended improvements to the layout of areas where staff put on and remove PPE. They also identified remedial work needed in two communal bathrooms so they could be cleaned thoroughly. The manager said this work had started shortly after the visit.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report therefore does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Safe visiting
The home had a process for safe visits, including COVID-19 testing, PPE, hand sanitising and social distancing. Some people also had risk assessments for short walks with a relative.
“A protocol was in place for ensuring visitors could safely visit.” from the report
PPE and staff training
There was enough PPE, and staff were observed using it in line with government guidance. Staff had infection control and PPE training and received regular COVID-19 updates.
“There was an ample supply of adequate and sufficient PPE, and staff were observed to be wearing this in line with government guidance.” from the report
Testing and oversight
COVID-19 testing followed the latest government guidance. The manager kept track of who had been tested and when.
“The registered manager had systems in place to give oversight of who had been tested and when, so that appropriate action could be taken.” from the report
PPE areas
needs fixingInspectors recommended changes to the set-up and location of areas where PPE was put on and removed. This was to reduce the risk of cross-contamination.
“We recommended some improvements to the set up and location of PPE 'donning and doffing' areas to reduce the risk of cross-contamination.” from the report
Communal bathrooms
needs fixingTwo communal bathrooms needed remedial work so that all areas could be cleaned thoroughly. The manager said the work had started shortly after the visit.
“We also highlighted some remedial works required to help ensure all areas of the service could be thoroughly cleaned, in particular two communal bathrooms.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the PPE areas after the inspection?
- 02Have the remedial works in both communal bathrooms been completed?
- 03How do you now check that the bathrooms and other areas can be thoroughly cleaned?
- 04How are COVID-19 testing records kept up to date for residents and staff?
- 05What infection control arrangements are currently in place for visitors?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, and the service was inspected but not rated; it did not provide a full assessment of the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 April 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, July 2019
Chrislyn House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 June 2019. The inspectors spoke with six people living at the home, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment records, training records and quality checks.
People and relatives said they felt safe and were happy with the care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk checks and safe medicines systems. The home was clean and staff followed infection control procedures.
Inspectors found that people received personalised care, had choices about daily life and were supported to eat well and access healthcare. Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. Activities were arranged around people's interests.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in December 2016.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Inspectors found that safeguarding concerns were handled appropriately and risks were assessed and monitored.
“People using the service said they felt safe at Chrislyn House and relatives told us they felt their family members were safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people as individuals and supported their dignity, privacy and choices. Inspectors observed friendly and caring interactions.
“People were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's histories, preferences and communication needs. Activities were based on what people enjoyed and people could choose how to spend their day.
“People received personalised care which was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Good teamwork and oversight
The home had a clear management structure. Staff said managers were available and inspectors found that checks were used to monitor quality.
“Audits and checks were carried out to monitor the quality of the service. Action was taken if any shortfalls were identified.” from the report
Good links with professionals
The home worked with healthcare and social care professionals to provide timely, joined-up support when people's needs changed.
“The service worked with the local authority and health and social care professionals to make sure people received joined up care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you decide when staffing levels need to increase if a person's needs change?
- 02How are medicines audits completed, and how quickly are any issues put right?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in best-interest decisions if they cannot make a decision themselves?
- 04How would you provide end of life care if my relative needed it?
- 05How can my relative or our family raise a complaint, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection covering all five CQC questions and included observation of care and checks of care, medicines, recruitment and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 July 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 Chrislyn House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 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.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.