Chestnut Lodge

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Inadequate At this assessment the rating has remained Inadequate. This meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to failing to safeguard people from potential harm or abuse, safe care and treatment, the ways people’s medicines were managed, safe environments, and safe and effective staffing.

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in people’s care, support and outcomes.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Inadequate. This meant people were not treated with compassion and there were breaches of dignity; staff caring attitudes had significant shortfalls.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Inadequate. This meant services were not planned or delivered in ways that met people’s needs.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to promoting person centred care to people.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Inadequate. At this assessment the rating has remained Inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in leadership. Leaders and the culture they created did not assure the delivery of high-quality care.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance at the service, and failure to notify the Care Quality Commission of notifiable safety events, under the registration’s regulation.