CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Croft House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, including testing, visitors, social distancing, admissions and managing outbreaks. They were somewhat assured about the safe use of PPE and the safety of the premises' layout and hygiene practices.
- 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
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 arrangements, but some PPE and hygiene practices needed development.
Inspectors visited the home on 19 November 2020. The visit was announced and formed part of a national review of infection prevention and control in care homes during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found hand washing facilities, PPE and infection control signs throughout the home. Staff had received infection control and PPE training. The home was testing people and staff in line with government guidance and had assessed COVID-19 risks.
The inspectors were assured about most areas, including visitors, social distancing, admissions, testing and managing outbreaks. They were only somewhat assured that PPE was being used safely and that the layout and hygiene practices supported safety. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control equipment
Hand washing facilities, PPE and infection control signs were available near the entrance and around the home.
“Hand washing facilities, personal protective equipment (PPE) and signage on infection control procedures were available near the entrance and throughout the care home.” from the report
Testing arrangements
The home had arrangements to test people and staff for COVID-19 in a consistent way that followed national guidance.
“The provider had appropriate arrangements to test people and staff for COVID- 19 and was following government guidance on testing.” from the report
Staff training
All staff had received training in infection control and using PPE.
“All staff had received training on infection control and the use of PPE.” from the report
Keeping families connected
The home helped people stay in contact with relatives and friends, including through phone and video messaging when visits were not possible.
“Family members and friends who were unable to visit the home could stay in touch with people with phone and video messaging.” from the report
COVID-19 risk assessments
The provider assessed the impact of COVID-19 on people and staff and took steps to reduce risks, including avoiding public transport.
“Risk assessments were carried out to assess the impact of COVID- 19 on people and staff.” from the report
PPE use
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that PPE was being used effectively and safely. The report does not give further detail about the specific problems.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Premises hygiene
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured about safety through the home's layout and hygiene practices. They signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider was promoting safety through the layout and hygiene practices of the premises.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to PPE use since inspectors were only somewhat assured it was being used effectively and safely?
- 02What improvements have you made to the home's layout and hygiene practices since this inspection?
- 03What resources did the provider use after inspectors signposted resources to develop infection prevention and control?
- 04How will my relative keep in contact with family if visits are restricted?
- 05How often are people and staff tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
This was an announced thematic review of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it inspected Safe but did not award a rating or assess the other four questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 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, July 2019
St Anne's Community Services - Croft House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with communication with staff needing improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 6 and 7 June 2019. One inspector spoke with four people living in the home, two relatives and five staff. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, were treated kindly and had their independence supported. Relatives were positive about the care and management.
Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, care was personalised and people were supported with food, drink, health appointments, relationships and activities. Staff were trained and suitable recruitment checks were completed.
The main weakness was that some staff felt their views were not properly considered by the provider. Inspectors recommended better communication and engagement with staff. This was an improvement recommendation, not a breach of regulations.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff showed concern for people's rights, privacy and dignity.
“People were treated with kindness and respect by staff.” from the report
Promoting independence
Staff supported people to build confidence, develop skills, make choices and take positive risks.
“People were supported to grow in confidence and develop their skills.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Inspectors found medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to provide the support people needed.
“Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and returned to the pharmacy when they were no longer required.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained person-centred information and were reviewed when people's support needs changed.
“People had comprehensive care plans in place which contained person-centred information.” from the report
Good links with health services
The home worked with health professionals and acted on their advice to support people's wellbeing.
“Regular visits from other professionals ensured people received the support they required, and their health needs were met.” from the report
Staff communication and engagement
needs fixingSome staff felt the provider did not always consider their views. Inspectors said this sometimes left staff feeling disengaged and recommended better communication.
“We recommend the provider improves communication and engagement with staff at the service.” from the report
Reviewing incident patterns
minorThe home monitored accidents and incidents, but inspectors said the system could be improved to identify patterns or trends.
“This could be further adapted to identify any patterns or trends.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure staff views are considered when new policies or changes are introduced?
- 02What changes have you made to identify patterns or trends in accidents and incidents?
- 03How will you support my relative to develop independence and take positive risks safely?
- 04How are my relative's care plans reviewed when their needs, routines or preferences change?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in decisions about care and health support?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the care provided and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 July 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 Croft House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 March 2011.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 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.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.