CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Chads House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment and safe medicines systems. Infection prevention arrangements were also found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The report says the previous ratings for areas not inspected were used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The overall findings said staff were kind and respected people's dignity and privacy.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The overall findings said people received person-centred support and were supported to make choices.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong oversight from the provider and registered manager, regular checks and audits, good communication and a person-centred culture.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some areas of the home needing updating.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 and 23 May 2023. The inspection team reviewed care records, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment files, audits and the premises. They met all four people living at the home, spoke with five staff and received feedback from a professional and relatives.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems and good infection control. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and were supported to remain as independent as possible.
The rating remains Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in 2018. This inspection did not assess Effective, Caring or Responsive. Their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Safe staffing
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. The home also used the same agency staff where needed to provide continuity.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs. Rotas were planned well in advance” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored and managed safely. People were supported to manage their medicines independently where this was safe.
“Medicines were stored and managed safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw person-centred interactions. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity, including knocking before entering rooms.
“People received person-centred support from staff who were kind and caring.” from the report
Strong management oversight
Senior leaders visited regularly to check care quality and safety. Shortfalls found through these checks were put right.
“Members of the senior leadership team visited the service 8 weekly to undertake checks and audits of care safety and quality.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Accidents and incidents were reviewed, with actions such as staff training used to reduce the risk of problems happening again.
“Lessons were learned when things went wrong.” from the report
Some parts of the building need updating
minorInspectors noted that parts of the environment needed updating and decoration. A schedule of works was in place for 2023, including changes to the kitchen, communal areas and bathrooms.
“Areas in the environment required updating and decoration.” from the report
- 01Which improvements in the 2023 schedule of works have been completed, and what remains to be done?
- 02How will staff support my relative to manage medicines safely and independently?
- 03How are risk assessments kept up to date if my relative's needs or risks change?
- 04How will the home make sure my relative's communication preferences and personal choices are understood by all staff?
- 05How will relatives be kept informed about incidents, care changes and progress?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 June 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.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some end-of-life plans needing updates.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 1 May 2018. One inspector met all four people living in the home, spoke with three people, two relatives and five staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found that people were safe and supported by enough well-trained staff. Staff knew people well, understood their communication, respected their choices and helped them take part in everyday life and community activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was rated Good at its previous inspection in January 2016 and remained Good.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff and said recruitment was carried out safely. Staff received regular training and supervision to help them meet people's needs.
“There were enough staff available who had been recruited safely.” from the report
Kind relationships
Staff knew people well and treated them with respect and affection. They supported people to communicate and make choices in ways that suited them.
“People had warm and affectionate relationships with staff.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences and communication methods. The home supported people to take part in activities, go out and stay connected with family.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Strong management checks
The provider carried out regular quality checks and used incidents and staff discussions to identify learning. Inspectors found an open and supportive management culture.
“The provider had a comprehensive governance system in place.” from the report
End-of-life plans needed updating
needs fixingEnd-of-life care plans were in place for three people, but the report says they needed updating. The provider planned work across its services to improve these plans.
“There were end of life care plans were in place for three people however the deputy manager told us they were in need of updating.” from the report
- 01Have the end-of-life care plans now been updated for the people who needed them?
- 02How will you make sure my relative's communication style and preferences are recorded and understood by all staff?
- 03What training and supervision will the staff supporting my relative receive?
- 04How will my relative be supported to take part in activities, use local services and keep in touch with family?
- 05How do managers check care quality and act on any incidents or concerns?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 June 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 St Chads House
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 February 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
25 live-in carers within about an hour of Bath and North East Somerset
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 £1,030 to £1,320 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She enabled mum to lead a high quality life in her own home until the very end and Lena and her family became close personal friends to me and my family.”
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.