Background to this inspection
Updated
2 April 2021
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.
As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.
This inspection took place on 18 March 2021 and was announced.
Updated
2 April 2021
This inspection took place on the 27 and 29 June 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced. This was the first inspection at the Chocolate Works Care Village since it registered with the CQC on 30 May 2017.
The Chocolate Works Care Village is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The Chocolate Works Care Village can accommodate up to 102 people across three separate communities, each of which have separate adapted facilities. One of the communities specialises in providing care to people living with dementia. Although the service had opened in June 2017 there had been a gradual opening of communities and people had moved in on a planned process. At the time of our inspection there were 54 people living at the service.
The service 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 told us they felt safe. Staff understood how to safeguard people from avoidable harm. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s. There had been some difficulties in the recruitment and retention of staff which had led to a high use of agency staff.
Medicines were safely managed and risks were mitigated as far as possible whilst respecting people’s choices.
Staff were recruited safely and received a robust induction and ongoing training programme. Staff described being well supported and were confident and happy in their roles.
People were supported to access support from health and social care professionals as needed.
We received mixed feedback about the quality of the food. The provider was working with people and the supplier to address these concerns.
The environment had been designed to meet the needs of people living at the service and to ensure it was as inclusive as possible. Some improvements were required to address the issues of noise travelling between two communities. The provider had identified this and was working towards a solution prior to our inspection.
The service adhered to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Consent was sought and choices were offered to people.
Staff were kind and compassionate. They understood and respected people’s needs and wishes. People were relaxed and comfortable in their surroundings and visitors were welcomed.
Care was planned, delivered and reviewed with the person at the centre. People were supported to have a comfortable, pain free death with their loved ones.
There were a range of activities on offer for people and those who were able to, had been involved in choosing the range of activities on offer. However, people told us they would like more activities to take place on their own communities.
People and their families knew how to raise concerns and complaints and these were taken seriously. Lessons were learnt when issues were identified.
The management team were committed to delivering a high standard of care. There were robust systems in place to audit the quality of the service. They understood the challenges of opening a new service. They operated a pragmatic and planned approach to this.
The ethos and values of the service were adhered to by staff and the management team.