CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Castlethorpe Nursing Home
Not yet rated: the CQC has not published a rated inspection for this home, which is usual for a new registration.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Inspected but not rated; the previous Requires Improvement rating remained, while staffing and recruitment problems continued despite kind staff.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 27 September 2022. One inspector looked specifically at staffing and recruitment. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked recruitment files, rotas and other staffing records.
The home still had too few staff at times, according to people and relatives. Staff were described as kind, but people said staff were too busy to spend time talking with them. The staffing tool was not kept up to date or reviewed regularly.
Recruitment checks were not reliable. There were gaps in employment histories and references. Records about overseas workers' visas and work restrictions were not readily available, and staff planning shifts did not always know about these restrictions. The agency's staff were usually reported to arrive on time and stay for the full visit.
Kind staff
People felt safe when staff supported them and described staff as caring and kind.
“People felt safe when receiving support from staff and spoke of the caring nature of staff.” from the report
Reliable agency visits
People using the agency were reported to usually receive visits on time, with staff staying for the full call.
“For the domiciliary care service, staff were reported to usually attend on time and stay for the full call.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousPeople and relatives said there were not always enough staff, leaving little time for conversation or personal attention. The staffing planning tool was also not regularly updated.
“Failure to have enough staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment processes was a continued breach of Regulation 18, (Staffing) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Recruitment gaps
seriousRecruitment records had missing employment history and references. This meant the checks used to recruit staff were not robust.
“Recruitment processes were not safe. Systems in place were not robust and gaps in employment records were identified, including references and gaps in employment history.” from the report
Visa oversight
seriousUp-to-date visa information was not readily available, and staff planning shifts did not always know about work restrictions affecting overseas workers.
“There was not sufficient oversight of this to ensure restrictions on working were adhered to.” from the report
- 01How many staff are on duty on each shift now, and how do you check that this matches residents' needs?
- 02How often is the dependency tool reviewed, and can you show us the latest review?
- 03Have all staff files now been checked for complete employment histories and references?
- 04How do you check overseas workers' visas and work restrictions before including them on a rota?
- 05What has replaced the activities worker, and how do residents get time for conversation and activities?
This was a targeted inspection of staffing and recruitment only; it did not assess the full Safe question or the other four key questions, so the previous Requires Improvement rating remained. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 November 2022 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.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care but staffing, risk management and records were not reliable.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 29 and 30 July 2021. They spoke with six people, seven relatives and 13 staff. They reviewed medicine records, care records, staff files and management records.
The home was caring and responsive. People and relatives praised staff's kindness, the food and the care. Staff respected people's privacy and helped them keep in touch with family and friends.
There were important shortfalls. Staffing levels were not always enough, risk assessments were incomplete, and some medicine and care records had gaps. Activities and social support were limited, and the home's checks had not found these problems.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also Requires Improvement. Caring and Responsive were rated Good. The provider was asked for an action plan and CQC said it would monitor progress and return to inspect again.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff's kindness. Inspectors saw staff maintain people's privacy and dignity.
“People and relatives praised the staff for their kindness and compassion.” from the report
People involved in care
People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Staff respected people's choices and routines.
“People were involved in decision making and their choices were respected by staff.” from the report
Healthcare support
The home worked with GPs and other professionals to support people's health needs. Feedback from visiting healthcare professionals was positive.
“The manager and staff understood the importance and benefits of working alongside other professionals.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention measures, including personal protective equipment, testing and visiting arrangements. Minor cleaning issues found during the visit were dealt with straightaway.
“We were assured the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousStaffing calculations were not effective and shifts had regular shortfalls. Some people waited for help, received rushed support or were left without meaningful engagement.
“The meal-time experience at lunch on the first day was poor with two people's support very rushed and another not receiving the support they needed.” from the report
Risk management
seriousSome risk assessments were incomplete or missing. Two pressure-relieving mattresses had incorrect settings, and there was no system to check them.
“The lack of robust risk management processes meant people were not fully protected from harm or injury.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingStaff did not always record when time-specific medicines had been given. Topical medicine charts also had gaps.
“Staff were not always recording the times they had administered medicines to be given at specific times, for example those to be taken half an hour before food.” from the report
Limited activities
needs fixingThere was limited social stimulation, particularly for people who stayed in their rooms. Staff had little time to support meaningful activities or conversation.
“There was limited social stimulation for people in order to prevent boredom and isolation.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousManagement systems had not identified the problems found by inspectors. Incident analysis and some records were not reliable.
“The governance systems in the service were limited and had failed to pick up the shortfalls we identified during our inspection.” from the report
- 01How many staff are now planned for each shift, and how do you cover vacancies or sickness?
- 02How do you check that each person's risk assessments are complete and updated, including pressure-relieving mattress settings?
- 03What checks now make sure time-specific and topical medicines are recorded correctly?
- 04What regular activities and one-to-one social support are available for people who spend much of their time in their rooms?
- 05What actions have you taken in response to the Regulation 17 and Regulation 18 breaches, and what evidence can you show of improvement?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the newly registered service covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 September 2021 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.
Every inspection of Castlethorpe Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- November 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 March 2020.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
32 live-in carers within about an hour of North Lincolnshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,300 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.