Croft House Care Home Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The registered manager promoted a positive culture in the service, where staff were respectful, open and inclusive. Staff told us they worked well as a team and helped each other to provide good care. One member of staff told us, “The new manager is great. They are bringing lots of new ideas.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Leaders were visible and approachable, and staff and visiting professionals spoke positively about the new registered manager’s proactive style. Relatives valued the resumption of meetings and described feeling listened to. Staff reported that concerns could be raised and acted upon, and they felt supported through team meetings and supervision.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff told us they felt confident raising concerns and understood safeguarding processes. Safeguarding referrals were made appropriately and notified to CQC. There were some historical concerns about staff practice and delayed responses however, this was used to drive continued vigilance to ensure people felt safe and supported to speak up without fear. One member of staff told us, “If I had a worry about anything, I would tell the manager or owners straight away.” Overall, there was a positive culture of openness and the registered manager was aware of the improvements needed.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff described feeling valued and supported, and training records showed staff were up to date with mandatory courses. There was no evidence of discrimination in the care provided. However, some relatives raised concerns about staff speaking in other languages over people, which could impact inclusivity.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

Governance systems were in place, including routine audits and action plans, but they were not always effective. Since starting at the service, the new registered manager has introduced positive changes and new ways of working however more time is needed to fully embed these approaches. Governance checks were not always successful in identifying areas of improvement. For example, unsecured medication trolleys, missing window restrictors, and short emergency pull cords were not identified through audits. While the provider has ambitious plans for digital transformation and operational efficiencies, these were not yet fully implemented at the time of inspection. The new registered manager had begun to implement new systems which would, in time, improve the oversight of the service once fully embedded.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The service worked with external professionals, including GPs and district nurses, and relatives confirmed they were kept informed about care. Weekly GP visits had been introduced, and referrals to dieticians and falls teams were completed, when needed.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to learning and improvement. Enhanced learning sessions were introduced following safety events, and staff spoke positively about training opportunities. The provider has invested in bespoke digital applications to streamline processes and improve efficiency, and medication audits showed improvements over time.