CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Creedy Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable staffing, risk management, medicines systems, infection control and emergency arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this inspection, so no current rating is given in this report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this inspection, so no current rating is given in this report. The report nevertheless says people received kind and compassionate care and that staff respected their privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed during this inspection, so no current rating is given in this report.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that management systems were effective, staff could raise concerns, and people's needs and wishes were central to the service. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Creedy Court rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support and effective management, with Safe and Well-led improved from Requires Improvement.
The inspection visit took place on 25 May 2022, with inspection activity continuing until 7 June. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, medicines were managed safely, staffing matched people's needs, and infection control arrangements were suitable. People received kind and compassionate care, with support shaped around their wishes, needs and independence.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. Both questions were rated Good and had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The report does not give new ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff understood people's individual needs and protected their privacy and dignity.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Support for independence
People could personalise their rooms and choose how they used different areas of the home. Staff supported people to follow interests and access community health and social care services.
“The environment was organised so that they could be as independent as possible.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk management
The home had a stable staff team with the skills needed to support people. Care plans and risk assessments gave staff information about how to keep people safe.
“Risk assessments and care plans gave staff the information they needed to support people to safely manage the risks they face.” from the report
Learning from incidents
Managers investigated incidents and introduced extra arrangements after a COVID-19 outbreak caused staffing pressures. Audits also showed a reduction in medicine errors after new strategies were introduced.
“When things went wrong, staff apologised and gave people honest information and suitable support” from the report
Open management
Staff felt able to raise concerns with managers. Management audits were used to identify problems and improve the service.
“Governance processes were effective and helped to hold staff to account, keep people safe, protect people's rights and provide good quality care and support.” from the report
Activities were still restarting
minorSome activities had stopped during the pandemic and were only beginning to resume at the inspection. Ask what activities are available now and how often people can take part.
“Although during the pandemic some activities ceased, they were beginning to start up again now.” from the report
- 01Which activities are currently available, now that some activities have restarted after the pandemic?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough staff if sickness or another emergency causes staffing levels to fall?
- 03What checks are now used to prevent and respond to medicine errors?
- 04What changes have been made to the fire safety system, room decoration and carpets since the inspection?
- 05What are the current ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, which were not reassessed in this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the report says the other questions were not looked at during this inspection and their earlier ratings were not updated. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 July 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, April 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care, but safety checks, staff training and quality monitoring were not always reliable.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection brought forward because of information about possible risks or concerns. Inspectors reviewed records, spoke with people, staff, managers and a healthcare professional, and contacted relatives and other professionals.
People generally said they felt safe and happy. Staff were kind, knew people's needs, supported independence and worked well with health professionals. Medicines, care planning, staffing and support with food and healthcare were also found to be effective.
The home was not always safe or well-led. Inspectors found infection risks in the laundry, a possible risk from an unsecured freezer, and many staff were not up to date with important training. The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement.
Kind, respectful support
People and relatives described staff as kind and knowledgeable. Inspectors saw staff taking time to understand what people wanted and supporting them at their own pace.
“People and relatives said that staff were kind and knowledgeable about the people they supported.” from the report
Good health support
Staff noticed changes in people's health and made appropriate referrals. Healthcare professionals confirmed that staff worked with them effectively.
“Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people received the support they needed if they became unwell or if their presentation changed.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care, food, activities and outings. Staff supported people to remain as independent as possible.
“People were encouraged to live as independently as possible, doing activities of their choice.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines systems were organised, and people received medicines at the right time. Staff were patient and did not rush people when giving medicines.
“Medicines systems were organised and people were receiving their medicines when they should.” from the report
Laundry infection risk
seriousOn the first inspection day, clean clothes were hung above a bin used for dirty laundry, and the washing line blocked easy access to the handwashing basin. The problem was addressed during the inspection, but 22 of 43 staff were not up to date with infection control training.
“People were not adequately protected from the risk of infection in the laundry.” from the report
Staff training gaps
seriousMany staff were not up to date with essential infection control or safeguarding training. This could mean staff were not fully aware of current guidance for supporting people safely.
“Records showed 17 out of 43 staff were not up to date with mandatory training about how to protect vulnerable people from the risks of abuse.” from the report
Unsecured freezer
seriousInspectors identified an unsecured freezer in an open hallway. Some people might have taken food that needed cooking before it was safe to eat.
“Another environmental risk was a freezer in an open hallway.” from the report
Communication between managers and staff
needs fixingSome staff said meetings with senior managers were not held as regularly as they wanted. They said this sometimes meant important communication was missed.
“They said this sometimes led to communications being missed.” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure the laundry remains safe and that clean and dirty laundry are kept separate?
- 02How many staff are now up to date with safeguarding and infection control training?
- 03What action was taken about the unsecured freezer in the open hallway?
- 04How do managers now check that their quality monitoring finds environmental and safety problems?
- 05How will people, relatives and staff be involved in planning and checking improvements?
This was an unannounced responsive focused inspection prompted by information about possible risk or concern; the report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led, but no separate ratings for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 2019 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 Creedy Court
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 December 2010.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.