Chacombe Park

“There was a strong focus on safety. Safeguarding concerns were reported and acted upon, and staff understood how to raise issues internally or externally if required. Risks were assessed and reviewed regularly, and people and families were involved in decision-making about their care. Medicines were managed safely, with staff trained and assessed as competent to administer them. Systems for infection prevention and control were in place, supported by appropriate policies and procedures. Although some lapses were observed during the inspection, these were rectified promptly, and staff were reminded of safe practice.”

“Care and treatment were delivered in line with best practice. Assessments were thorough and regularly updated, and care plans reflected people’s personal choices, cultural needs and preferences. Staff used recognised tools to monitor health and followed national guidance when people’s needs changed. Referrals to professionals such as GPs, therapists and dieticians were timely, and visiting professionals praised the organisation and communication of staff. People were supported to live healthier lives, and relatives told us they had seen improvements in weight, mobility and confidence since moving to the home.”

“People were consistently treated with kindness and respect. Staff demonstrated warmth and compassion in their interactions and knew people well, including their routines and preferences. Care was tailored to each individual, and people were supported to make choices and maintain independence where possible. Relatives[CC1] said staff were caring and attentive, and people told us they felt safe and comfortable.”

“The service was responsive to people’s needs. Care plans were reviewed promptly when changes occurred, and staff adapted care to reflect personal routines. Activities were varied and meaningful, including opportunities for social interaction, music, and community involvement. Families confirmed they were consulted about changes and felt their feedback was valued. People had equal access to health services and activities, and care plans contained details about cultural, spiritual and social needs.”

“The service was well led. Leaders were visible, approachable and engaged with people, relatives and staff. Staff said they felt valued and supported, and relatives told us they had confidence in the leadership. Systems of governance and accountability were effective. A range of audits and checks were carried out, and where issues were identified, prompt action was taken and monitored. Leaders encouraged learning and improvement, and staff were supported to share ideas about how to develop the service.”

“Overall, the service demonstrated that it could provide safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led care. Areas for improvement, such as strengthening documentation of mental capacity assessments and ensuring consistency in infection control practices, had already been acknowledged by the provider and actions were being taken.”