The inspection took place on the 21 November 2016 and was unannounced. The home was last inspected on the 28th April 2016 in response to information we received. Before that the home received a comprehensive inspection on 27 November 2015.

Chestnut Residential Care Home provides care and accommodation for up to five older people. At the time of our inspection visit there were five people staying at the care home.

We heard positive comments about the service and people and their representatives clearly appreciated the atmosphere of a small care home.

Chestnut Residential Care home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were protected from the risk of being cared for by unsuitable staff because robust recruitment practices were operated. Medicines were well managed. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who received appropriate training to carry out their role. People were protected from the risk of abuse by staff who understood safeguarding procedures.

People received personalised care, and they were treated with kindness. People’s privacy and dignity was respected and they were supported to maintain their independence. Activities had been developed to include a wider range of activities including music and movement and lunch trips.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 27 November 2015 where we found breaches of regulations in relation to staff recruitment and deprivation of liberty safeguards. The provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. After that inspection we received concerns in relation to staffing, medicines, management of laundry and recording of complaints. As a result we undertook an unannounced focused inspection to look into those concerns and also to check the outstanding breaches from our inspection of 27 November 2015.

Chestnut Residential Care Home provides care and accommodation for up to five older people. At the time of our inspection there were four people using the service.

Some aspects of the management of medicines and the handling of laundry were not fully safe.

People were protected against the employment of unsuitable staff because improvements had been made to staff recruitment practices. Adequate staffing levels had been maintained while new staff were being recruited.

People’s rights were protected through the use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

We found the environment of the care home was warm and clean. One person told us they were “quite happy” and another person who had come in for a short stay told us their experience was “better than expected”. A visitor told us “Mum seems happy here”.

Chestnut Residential Care Home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for (location's name) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

A single inspector carried out this inspection and spoke with four people who use the service, one care assistant, the registered manager and a representative of the provider. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People had been cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people that lived at Chestnut. The training records we saw showed us that staff had received training in order to perform their roles safely.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. No applications had been to the local DoLS team at the time of our inspection, but the registered manager showed us that they were in regular contact with them. This showed us that they understood their responsibilities to keep people safe.

One person told us, "I definitely feel safe here and would definitely recommend it".

Is the service effective?

It was clear from what we observed and from speaking with staff that they understood people's care and support needs. The care plans that we saw were up to date and contained information that was tailored towards people's individual needs. One person told us "the staff are brilliant" and another told us "staff know me and know what help I need".

Is the service caring?

Both the registered manager and the one care assistant that we spoke with and observed were kind and attentive to people's needs. Both demonstrated an in-depth knowledge of the people they were supporting. One staff member told us "I love being able to really care for people; it's all about the residents here". One person who used the service told us "here they make you feel like you are somebody".

Is the service responsive?

The records that we looked at confirmed that people's individual care needs and preferences had been recorded and that care had been planned and had taken place accordingly. We saw that people's personal choices were respected, such as what time they wanted to get up or go to bed.

Is the service well-led?

We saw that there were quality assurance processes in place and that people were asked for their feedback on the service they received on a regular basis. We also saw that the provider made changes to the service based on that feedback.

During our visit we spoke with one person living in the home and three visiting relatives. People we spoke with told us the home was very welcoming and staff looked after people well. One relative told us, “we chose this home because it is small and family orientated”. The home had not open for very long and was not yet at full occupancy. One person living in the home told us that they had been involved in meeting with a prospective new person and the manager had asked for their views.

Care plans had been written with the involvement of the individual and reflected their needs and preferences. We observed that staff had a good knowledge of the people they supported. They were seen responding to people respectfully and in a manner appropriate to the person.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. The home was a family run business and the provider and manager lived close by and regularly stayed overnight on the premises. We could see that there was an open relationship with the manager and people living in the home. We saw that people were comfortable airing their views about the home and were actively involved in discussions about future developments to the service.

This inspection took place on 27 November 2015 and was unannounced.

Chestnut Residential Care Home provides care and accommodation for up to five older people.

Chestnut Residential Care Home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were happy with their care however people were at risk of receiving care from unsuitable staff because robust recruitment procedures were not being applied.

People had their ability to consent assessed and their wishes respected however those who had been deprived of their liberty to keep them safe did not have the authorisations in place as required by law.

People and their representatives made positive comments about Chestnut Residential Care Home; they appreciated the caring approach of the staff and the atmosphere of a small care home. Their individual needs and wishes were known to staff who had achieved positive relationships with them. People were consulted for their views on the service in particular meals and activities. People and their representatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Risks to people’s safety were identified, assessed and appropriate action taken. Visitors were welcomed into the care home. One visitor described the care home as a “cheerful place” and added “we all end up laughing when we visit”.

Staff received support to develop knowledge and skills for their role. A small staff team worked closely together to keep people safe and meet their needs. One staff member commented “all the staff here are good, we work well together”. The management were visible and accessible to people, their visitors and staff.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.