CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Croft Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Medicines, staffing, recruitment and risk assessments were managed safely. However, personal emergency evacuation plans were not up to date and contained incorrect information.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were supported and people had access to healthcare professionals, suitable food and activities. Eight staff members had lapsed moving and assisting training and eight had lapsed infection control training, although this was arranged after inspectors raised it.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors observed patient, reassuring interactions and found that people were encouraged to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reflected people's needs and preferences. People were supported with activities they enjoyed, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager provided strong leadership and carried out regular checks and audits. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views, and staff said they felt listened to and supported.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind and responsive care, but the Safe rating Requires Improvement because emergency information was not accurate.
Inspectors visited without warning on 12 and 16 April 2018. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care, looked around the home and checked care, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good overall, and remained Good since the previous inspection in January 2016. Inspectors found that staff were kind, respectful and well trained overall. People received personalised care, enjoyed activities and meals, and could involve relatives in their care.
The Safe rating was Requires Improvement. Personal emergency evacuation plans were out of date and contained incorrect details. Some moving and assisting and infection control training had also lapsed. The manager updated the evacuation information during the inspection and arranged the outstanding training.
Safe medicines
Medicines were checked daily and audited monthly. Staff had completed medicines training and their competence was regularly reviewed.
“Medicines records we viewed were up to date and accurate.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with patience, dignity and compassion. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“Staff were kind, caring and compassionate towards the people they supported.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included detailed information about people's routines, preferences, communication and support needs. Activities were adapted to people's abilities and interests.
“Each person's care records contained a 'day in the life' document which described the person's day and how they wish to be supported.” from the report
Emergency evacuation plans
seriousPersonal emergency evacuation plans did not reflect people's current needs and included incorrect personal details. The manager corrected the information during the inspection, but no review period had been set.
“However, the information did not reflect people's current needs and personal details were incorrect.” from the report
Lapsed staff training
needs fixingEight staff members had lapsed moving and assisting training, and eight had lapsed infection control training. The manager arranged the required training after inspectors identified the issue.
“Eight staff members training for moving and assisting had lapsed in February 2018 and eight staff members infection control training had lapsed in March 2018.” from the report
Safeguarding trend checks
needs fixingThe home recorded safeguarding concerns but did not review the information for patterns or lessons. The manager said a monitoring system would be introduced.
“The home had a process of recording the information but did not review the data to determine any trends or patterns for future lessons learnt.” from the report
- 01How often are each person's personal emergency evacuation plans now reviewed, and who checks that the details remain accurate?
- 02Have all staff completed the moving and assisting and infection control training that had lapsed?
- 03How do you check that night staff could safely evacuate residents if there were an emergency at night?
- 04What system is now used to identify patterns in safeguarding concerns and accidents?
- 05How do you make sure changes in a person's needs are added to every relevant care document?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, the premises and how the home was managed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 June 2018 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 The Croft Residential Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Croft Residential Care Home →
- April 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 November 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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.