St Catherines Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At the last inspection we rated this key question as good. At this inspection this key question has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

While we noted people mostly looked well dressed, comfortable and in accordance with their preferences, we found people were not offered the toilet or taken to the toilet for most of our observations. We had also been told at times people were encouraged to use their pad rather than use a toilet, commode or bedpan. Towards the end of our visit, continence care was being given to people who were cared for in bed.

We raised with the registered manager our feedback based on observations. They told us staff always offered the toilet/continence care before or after meals. We advised this did not happen on the day of our visit. We reviewed records and found there were extended gaps for toilet needs or continence care being delivered. A person also told us they were waiting for a shave. This was an area that needed to be improved to ensure people’s comfort and care needs were met. We discussed these points with the registered manager and the director who gave us assurances on how they would address them and provided us with an action plan and newly implemented checks.

We also discussed bath options and bathrooms did not appear to be in use. We queried what a bed bath entailed and if a bath was an option over a shower. Not all care plans included information about preferences in relation to baths, showers and how people needed to be supported with this.

Care plans were personalised and captured most people’s needs, and preferences. These were reviewed regularly. However, we noted in 2 of the 4 plans we reviewed, there was missing information based on their assessed needs on preadmission and our observations on the day of our visit.

Following our feedback the management team provided us with updated records and an action plan stating how these issues would be addressed, with some actions already in progress.

People felt their needs were met in a way they liked. A person said, “They are very good.” Most relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. A relative said, “The staff do a good job.” However, 2 relatives were not fully satisfied with 1 saying their family member’s hair and nails had been very overgrown.

We spoke with staff, and they were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting and the support they required.

The registered manager carried out spot checks and supervision of staff to help ensure they worked in a person-centred way.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People with varying care needs were living at the service. Staff worked with visiting health and social care professionals to ensure the support met their needs.

There was appropriate access and referrals to health and social care professionals. We saw health care professionals attending on the day of our visit.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People told us they had access to information as they needed it. Relatives were positive about communication from the home. A relative said, “They keep me informed and let me know what is happening.”

Information was readily available and provided through meetings and handovers. Information could also be provided in different formats where needed. The registered manager shared, ‘Service user guide is available in audio if required. Complaints procedure is printed in easy read format and displayed in every room. Our menus are available in picture format. Staff assist service users with phone calls and video calls to their families and MDT professionals. Menus are available in pictorial format. All our staff are trained on communication. We conduct pre assessments prior to admissions, this helps to determine what care and support the individual needs and what we need to support them. One of our staff members is trainer Hearing aider and supports other staff to care and maintain hearing aids for service users.’

There were resident and relative meetings. Relatives were also in regular contact with staff as part of people’s care plan development and reviews but also events and activities at the home.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People told us they felt they could speak up or make a complaint if they needed to. Relatives told us they were involved and listened to. A relative said, “There have been a few issues, but they have all been resolved.”

Complaints raised were investigated and had an outcome recorded. The complaints policy was displayed in the home. However, this included the previous registered manager’s details.

Staff told us people were able to speak up and had opportunities to share their views.

There was a record of resident and relatives’ meetings. These covered subjects including staffing, updates in the home and meals. However, the 2 most recent resident meetings (dated March and May 2026) included identical information which indicated an issue capturing and responding to people’s views or an agenda that needed further development. People who were cared for in their rooms had the opportunity for 1-1 meetings.

Some people had raised concerns about language barriers with some staff. We noted this remained an issue for some people as this was also raised with us on the day of our visit. However, we did not observe any concerns in relation to this during our observations and conversations.

The home had a suggestion box and information on how to share reviews on a care home review website.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People and relatives told us they received the care and medical support when needed.

The management team had systems in place in the home which helped ensure they had an overview of care and support people received. This gave them assurances everyone had the support needed and opportunities, for example access to health and support services, care and social engagement and activities, were available to everyone.

There were systems in place to ensure people had access to external health and social care professionals, including out of hours or in an emergency. The registered manager shared how the team worked with mental health teams who could offer 24-hour support, tissue viability, Parkinson’s nurses, visiting dentist and opticians so all could access these services and many other support services.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People with a varying needs, backgrounds and cultures were supported by the home. They told us they felt supported. Staff told us they were confident people were treated equally and as individuals. The provider had policies in place to ensure people were treated equally. There were opportunities for people to give feedback about their care and support.

The registered manager shared, ‘To ensure our care is person-centred, ensuring residents individual need and wishes are met, our staff have undertaken Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion training with monitoring during competency checks. Residents are addressed according to their preference. Our activities are adapted for the ages and abilities of our residents. We have various activities specific for different genders and ages. We ensure all Religions are catered for. Residents decide whether they would like to celebrate different events which are celebrated in other parts of the world and some residents, e.g. Diwali, Buddhist Festival of lights, St Patricks Day, and Pride week. Our activities include the residents choosing a country every month then celebrating it through music food etc. We host a multicultural day where residents and staff dress up in their cultural regalia.’

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People were involved in decisions and planning in relation to moving into the home to help ensure their plans met their wishes. Reviews were completed to help ensure information was still accurate.

Most care plans we reviewed consisted of end of life plans. There was a record of any Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and other needed information. Some plans required more holistic information rather than tasks. Following our feedback the management team introduced actions to develop these further.

Staff had received training in relation to end of life care, so they knew how to help ensure people were supported well if and when this time arose.