Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by HF Trust

Chy Keres

Tregadillett, Launceston, PL15 7EU

Goodpublished 4 July 2023, 3 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management and systems for safeguarding and learning from incidents. They identified missed weekly water temperature checks and recommended a review of health and safety audits.
Effective?
Good
Staff assessed people's physical, mental, communication and sensory needs. Training was refreshed, people's dietary preferences were supported, and the home worked with health and social care professionals.
Caring?
Good
Caring was not inspected during this visit. The report says ratings for key questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection.
Responsive?
Good
Responsive was not inspected during this visit. The report says ratings for key questions not inspected were carried over from the last inspection.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found visible management, positive feedback from relatives and staff, regular opportunities to give feedback, and action plans when audits identified improvements.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, July 2023

HF Trust - Chy Keres is rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led respite care, with some safety checks needing improvement.

The inspection was unannounced. Inspectors visited on 6 June 2023 and completed their inspection activity between 6 and 8 June. They spoke with people staying at the home, managers and care staff. They reviewed care records, staff records, medicines and management records, and contacted relatives and an external professional.

The home provides planned and emergency respite care for autistic people and people with a learning disability. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines management, suitable care records and a clean environment. People were supported to make choices, and staff knew their needs well.

The overall rating is Good. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so the report used ratings from the previous inspection for the overall rating. Inspectors recommended that health and safety auditing processes should be reviewed.

What inspectors praised
  • Staff know people well

    Many staff had worked at the home for several years. Inspectors said low staff turnover helped provide consistent support.

    Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well.from the report
  • Safe medicines

    Medicines were brought in their original packaging, given according to prescribers' instructions and checked by a second trained staff member.

    Medicines were managed safely. Families provided information on the medicines their relative was taking and updated this with any changes.from the report
  • Choice and communication

    Staff supported people to make decisions and used communication methods suited to their needs.

    Staff supported people to make decisions following best practice in decision-making. Staff communicated with people in ways that met their needs.from the report
  • Support for families

    Relatives were asked for feedback, and inspectors received positive comments about the service and its management.

    Relatives told us their family member was valued and had a good time when staying at the service.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Missed water safety checks

    needs fixing

    Weekly water temperature checks had not been completed since October 2022. The manager said this would be assigned to a named staff member, and inspectors recommended reviewing the auditing process.

    Water temperature checks, which should have been completed by staff weekly, had not been carried out since October 2022.from the report
  • Risk information was not always easy to find

    needs fixing

    Advice from other agencies was not always transferred to the relevant risk assessment. The manager told inspectors this had been addressed after the inspection.

    It had not always been transferred to the appropriate risk assessment to ensure the detail was easily accessible to staff.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Have weekly water temperature checks been restarted, and can we see how they are recorded and audited?
  2. 02How do you make sure advice from health professionals is transferred promptly into the correct risk assessment?
  3. 03Who will be managing the home during my relative's stay, and how is cover arranged when the registered manager is supporting another service?
  4. 04How do you quickly assess and support someone arriving for an emergency placement?
  5. 05What face-to-face supervision and support will staff caring for my relative have?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; the report says the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 July 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Chy Keres

4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Chy Keres

  2. July 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. July 2017Goodstayed Good
    Effective: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. May 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. December 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. November 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Same provider

Other services run by HF Trust Limited

24 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Orchard View

Alcester, B50
Good
Residential
Rated 2 years agoReport explained

HF Trust Chestnuts

Bognor Regis, PO22
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 3 years agoReport explained

The Laurels

Arundel, BN18
Good
Residential
Rated 3 years agoReport explained

Thetford Road

London, KT3
Good
Residential
Rated 3 years agoReport explained

Trelowen

St Austell, PL25
Good
Residential
Rated 8 months agoReport explained
Nearby

Other care homes near Launceston

Penbownder House

Launceston, PL15 · 1.0 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 14 months agocare home

Newport Square

Launceston, PL15 · 3.3 km
Good
Residential
Rated 3 years agocare home

Kernow House

Launceston, PL15 · 3.3 km
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home

Our House

Launceston, PL15 · 3.3 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 11 months agoReport explained

Pen Inney House

Launceston, PL15 · 3.9 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home