CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Croftland Care Home with Nursing
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed infection prevention well, including PPE, testing, social distancing, admissions and outbreak arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Croftland Care Home with Nursing was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
Inspectors visited the home on 15 December 2020. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control because the home was being used for people discharged from hospital with COVID-19.
The home had a separate COVID-19 recovery unit with its own entrances, equipment and staff arrangements. Staff could shower, change uniforms and take breaks without mixing with staff working elsewhere in the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, carried out regular testing, supported social distancing and had suitable infection control policies. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Separate recovery unit
The home had a self-contained area for people recovering from COVID-19. Separate entrances, facilities and equipment helped keep this unit apart from the rest of the home.
“The home had designated a fully self-contained and segregated unit as a COVID-19 recovery unit.” from the report
Staff kept separate
A dedicated staff team worked on the recovery unit. Staff had separate facilities and did not need to mix with other staff.
“This meant staff on the designated unit did not have to mix with staff working in the rest of the home.” from the report
PPE and testing
Inspectors saw staff using PPE in line with government guidance. Staff were tested weekly and residents monthly.
“Tests for COVID-19 were carried out weekly for staff and monthly for people living at the service.” from the report
Contact with families
Although non-essential visits were closed during lockdown, the home supported regular telephone and video calls with family and friends.
“People are supported to keep in touch with family and friends through regular telephone and video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people who have COVID-19 or are recovering from it kept separate from other residents?
- 02How often are staff and residents tested now, and what happens after a positive result?
- 03How do staff use PPE, and how do you check that it is being used safely?
- 04What visiting arrangements are currently in place, and how can relatives keep in touch if visits are restricted?
This was a focused inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 December 2020 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, February 2020
Rated Good after improvements; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 and 7 January 2020. The inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding and risk systems, safe medicines management, enough staff, suitable training and good support with food, drink and healthcare.
People said staff were kind and respectful. Their choices, preferences and communication needs were recorded. The home held meetings for residents and families, supported activities and dealt with complaints appropriately.
The previous inspection rated the service Requires Improvement in January 2019. The provider made improvements, and the home was no longer in breach of regulations at this inspection.
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Records had no gaps in signatures, and monthly audits were completed.
“Medicines records were clear and had no gaps in signatures.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as kind. Inspectors observed respectful communication and support for people's dignity and independence.
“We observed staff displaying commitment and enthusiasm which was evidenced in the humour, familiarity and non-verbal communication between people and staff.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's needs, wishes, likes and dislikes. Staff were seen following this guidance and offering choices.
“Care files explained people's like, dislikes and interests, to ensure staff knew how they wished to be cared for.” from the report
Good support with food and drink
People spoke positively about the food. Inspectors saw balanced meals, choices, help when needed and encouragement to drink.
“We observed the lunchtime meal, which was balanced and nutritional and served in a pleasant environment.” from the report
Activities staffing change
minorA new activities coordinator had been employed but had not started at the time of inspection. Activities were still being provided by other staff.
“A new activities coordinator had been employed, but had not yet commenced their role.” from the report
Part of the building was closed
minorOne floor had been closed for some time, so only three of the four floors were in use. The report does not describe this as a failure or say it affected care.
“At the time of the inspection one floor had been closed for a length of time so only three floors were in use.” from the report
- 01When will the activities coordinator start, and what activities are currently available for people who spend much of their time in bed?
- 02Why has one floor been closed, and how does this affect the home's current capacity and future plans?
- 03How do you check that medicines records and monthly medicines audits remain accurate?
- 04How are people's food, drink, communication and healthcare needs kept up to date in their care plans?
- 05How will residents and families be involved if the service changes its staffing, floors or activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, following the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 February 2020 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 Croftland Care Home with Nursing
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Croftland Care Home with Nursing →
- February 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Croftland Care Home with Nursing →
- January 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- March 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kirklees
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 £1,260 a week. 86 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.