CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Chimes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitor screening, safe admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning and social distancing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed as a separate question in this targeted inspection, although infection control policies and audits were reviewed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
The Chimes: inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed well.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 7 April 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full range of care provided.
Inspectors found effective procedures for visitors, admissions, testing, PPE, social distancing, cleaning and ventilation. Staff were using PPE properly, and there were enough staff to provide continuity if there was a shortage.
The home was clean, calm and hygienic. The service was marked 'Inspected but not rated', so this report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for the other care areas.
Infection control
The home had infection prevention procedures that staff understood and followed.
“The registered manager had established effective infection prevention and control procedures which were understood and followed by the staff.” from the report
PPE and testing
Inspectors found plentiful PPE, appropriate use of PPE and access to testing for people and staff.
“We were assured the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was hygienic, with enhanced cleaning and good ventilation.
“The premises had a good level of cleanliness and was hygienic throughout.” from the report
Staff continuity
There were enough staff to maintain support if there was a staff shortage.
“There were sufficient staff to provide continuity of support should there be a staff shortage.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitor health checks, temperature checks, PPE and lateral flow testing carried out now?
- 02What is the current process for admitting someone who has tested negative for COVID-19?
- 03How do you support new residents to self-isolate after admission?
- 04How do you maintain staffing continuity if there is a staff shortage?
- 05When was the home's last full inspection, and what ratings were given for caring, responsiveness and leadership?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staff records needing improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 1 and 2 July 2019. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely and were cared for by staff with suitable skills. The home was clean, well maintained and had plans for emergencies.
People told inspectors that staff were kind, respectful and responsive to their preferences. Staff supported people's health, nutrition, communication, activities and independence. The manager was described as approachable and used feedback and checks to improve the service.
The overall rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, published on 18 July 2018. Safe, Effective and Well-led had improved to Good. Caring and Responsive remained Good.
Safe care
Inspectors found good systems for protecting people from abuse, managing risks, giving medicines and responding to emergencies. The home was clean and tidy.
“The provider had systems to record, report and analyse any allegations of abuse.” from the report
Kind and dignified support
People and relatives gave very positive feedback about staff's kindness, respect for privacy and support for dignity.
“People were treated with respect, compassion and kindness, by staff who promoted equality and valued diversity.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff involved people in care planning and reviews. They recorded individual needs, preferences and communication requirements.
“People received care and support which was personalised to them.” from the report
Support for independence
Staff helped people maintain or regain life skills and confidence. Some people were supported to move to more independent settings.
“Staff promoted people's independence as far as possible.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff described leaders as approachable and caring. The manager used feedback and audits to shape improvements.
“The culture at the service was open and inclusive.” from the report
Incomplete recruitment files
needs fixingThe manager carried out suitability checks before staff started work, but some required information was not kept in staff personnel files. The provider was asked to review its processes.
“However, when we looked at the information held in staff personnel files, not all the required information was available.” from the report
Accessible information review
minorThe home was reviewing how best to meet its duties under the Accessible Information Standard, including sharing information with other services when needed.
“The area manager told us the service was currently reviewing how best to meet their obligations under AIS” from the report
Activities still developing
minorPeople took part in activities, but managers said further work was under way to explore individual interests and arrange a trip to the local zoo.
“The area manager and senior carer told us further work was being carried out to explore people's individual interests” from the report
- 01How have you made sure every staff personnel file now contains all the information required by law?
- 02How do you assess and provide activities that match each person's individual interests?
- 03How will you provide information in a way that meets each person's communication needs?
- 04How are people's end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date?
- 05How do you use feedback, audits and complaints to make further improvements?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with care and the premises both looked at. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 The Chimes
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 March 2013.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.