Chasfab Options Limited
Home care, Greenwich
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
Chasfab Options Limited: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in May 2025.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Rated Requires improvement in May 2025.
The latest rating was published 17 months ago.
How it compares locally
- One of 19 Requires improvement home care services in Greenwich, out of 53 with a rating.
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 21 May 2025 (assessment visit 15 November 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of assessment: 12 December 2024 to 5th February 2025. Chasfab Options Limited is a care at home service providing support to children aged 0 - 18 years, adults under 65 years, and people living with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection, there were 7 people using the service. There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection.
We have assessed the service against 'right support, right care, right culture guidance to make judgements whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability or autistic people, respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
Read the full summary
The service was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to, safe care and treatment, staffing, fit and proper persons employed and good governance.
Medicines administered to people were not always appropriately documented and some people had no medication administration records in place. People had no risk assessments in place in relation to their medical support needs. Care plans were not always person centred and lacked information about people's histories, likes and dislikes, and contained errors with people’s personal information. Care plans were also not always person centred, and did not always include information about people’s protected characteristics.
The service had enough staff employed to keep people safe. However, we found pre-employment checks failed to identify conflicting and missing information provided by staff in the application process.
The registered manager provided information staff had multiple training courses all delivered to staff over 2 days. This reflected poor planning of training as staff were not given sufficient time to absorb and reflect or give feedback on each course to ascertain understanding of the training they had received before moving to the next course.
The provider was introducing a new system where people would be able to give feedback on their care through digital systems to improve communication.
Staff told us they were happy working with the service, and they felt they were treated well by management.
In instances where CQC has decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.
-
Safe
No rating
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.
This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk of avoidable harm to people.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment, the way people’s medicines were managed, staffing, fit and proper persons employed.
-
Effective
No rating
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.
This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
-
Well-led
No rating
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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.
Questions to ask the service
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 21 May 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 21 May 2025. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 21 May 2025. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
Contact and registration details
| Address | 775 Sidcup Road, London, SE9 3SB |
|---|---|
| Neighbourhood | New Eltham, Greenwich |
| Registered manager | Julianah Balarabe |
| Registered with the CQC since | |
| What it provides |
|
| Who it supports |
|
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
| Provider | Chasfab Options Limited |
|---|---|
| Ownership type | Organisation |
| Companies House number | 10684748 (opens Companies House) |
Nearest alternatives
- – Caremark Greenwich & Bexley Home care, 0.3 miles awayNot yet rated
- G Right Choice Home Care Home care, 0.3 miles awayGood
- G Independent Home Care Team Home care, 0.3 miles awayGood
- G Eternal Care UK Limited Home care, 0.5 miles awayGood
- G Bluebird Care (Greenwich) Home care, 0.5 miles awayGood
Getting help from Royal Borough of Greenwich
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Royal Borough of Greenwich
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 020 8921 2304, Monday to Thursday 9am to 5pm, Friday 9am to 4pm. Out-of-hours emergencies: 020 8854 8888
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Royal Borough of Greenwich
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Chasfab Options Limited provide nursing care?
- The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Chasfab Options Limited.
- When was Chasfab Options Limited last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Chasfab Options Limited was published on 21 May 2025.
- Who runs Chasfab Options Limited?
- Chasfab Options Limited is run by Chasfab Options Limited.
- What is Chasfab Options Limited's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 21 May 2025.