CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Crossfields Lodge
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Not all staff were confident or competent to identify, monitor and manage risks. Some incidents were not recorded accurately, and this led to a breach of Regulation 12.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Specialist training had been provided, but not all staff were putting it into practice effectively. The provider arranged extra training and paired less experienced staff with experienced staff.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff showed warmth and respect, supported the person's preferred communication and respected their privacy, dignity, independence and choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was personalised and helped the person take part in chosen social and leisure activities. Staff continually reviewed communication systems and care plans.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The provider had acted on concerns, but monitoring of staff practice and quality assurance were not yet robust. Communication with people involved in the person's care also needed to improve.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care but safety, staff competence and management oversight needed improvement.
This was the first inspection since the home registered. Inspectors visited on 27 October and 2 November 2022, with inspection activity continuing until 24 November. They spoke with staff, the person's relative and health and social care professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, incident, staffing, training and quality records.
The person received caring and responsive support. Staff helped them make choices, use their preferred communication, take part in activities and access support from health professionals. Care plans were personalised and updated as staff learned more about the person's needs.
Inspectors found important weaknesses in safety and staff practice. Not all staff could identify and manage risks confidently, and some incidents were not recorded accurately. The provider had started refresher training, changed the staff team and arranged more experienced staff to work with less experienced staff, but these changes still needed to become established.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also Requires Improvement, while Caring and Responsive were Good. The provider was told to send an action plan, and progress will be monitored.
Personalised activities
Staff supported the person to pursue interests and take part in activities in the local area. Their care planning focused on meaningful goals and improving quality of life.
“Staff were supporting the person to take part in activities and pursue their interests in their local area.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff showing warmth and respect. Staff listened to the person's wishes and supported their privacy, dignity and independence.
“We observed staff showing warmth and respect when interacting with the person.” from the report
Communication support
Staff used the person's personalised communication systems and reviewed them with a speech and language therapist so they remained suited to the person's needs.
“The communication used by the person was continually being reviewed by staff and Speech and Language Therapist to ensure it was tailored to the person's needs.” from the report
Clean and hygienic home
The home had effective infection prevention measures and arrangements to keep the premises clean and hygienic.
“The service used effective infection prevention and control measures to keep the person safe, and staff supported the person to follow them.” from the report
Risks were not always managed
seriousNot all staff could identify, monitor or deal with risks effectively. Inspectors said this had affected the person's safety and welfare, resulting in a legal breach.
“Not all risk to the person's safety were mitigated through effective management of risk.” from the report
Staff practice and confidence
needs fixingTraining was available, but not all staff were confident or competent to use it in practice. The provider introduced refresher training and changes to staffing arrangements.
“Improvements were needed to ensure all staff were confident, and competent in their role.” from the report
Quality oversight
needs fixingThe provider's monitoring and oversight were not robust enough to ensure safe, consistent care. Improvements still needed to become established.
“The service's quality assurance, monitoring and oversight arrangements were not robust and required improvement” from the report
Communication about incidents
minorThe provider kept the relative, external agencies and CQC informed when things went wrong, but inspectors found that communication was not always timely.
“However, feedback we received, showed the provider's communications systems could be improved.” from the report
- 01What specific risks were identified at the inspection, and what has been done to reduce each one?
- 02How do you now check that every staff member can put specialist training into practice safely?
- 03What changes were made to the staff team and staff rotas, and will an experienced staff member always be present when needed?
- 04How are incidents recorded, reviewed and used to prevent the same problems happening again?
- 05How will the manager and provider measure whether the required improvements are working?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five CQC key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 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.
Every inspection of Crossfields Lodge
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 May 2021.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.