You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 12 February 2020

About the service: 35 Cranbrook Road Care Home is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to five people. The service supports people with complex mental health needs. We met four people who were living at the home on the day of our visit.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The staff who supported people were not always being properly supervised and supported in their work. This meant there was a risk staff could be providing care that was not safe or suitable for people. We asked a senior manager about this. They recognised there was work needed to ensure all supervisions were completed.

Some care plans and risk assessments had not been updated and reviewed to make sure they were accurate and up to date.There were audit systems in place however the registered manager’s audits had not identified the shortfalls we found. These audits were meant to be completed to improve the care and service.

People felt they were well supported and their full range of needs had been assessed.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place to support staff so people's individual needs could be met and risks minimised.

People’s medicines were managed safely by staff who were trained and competent to do this. To support staff there were medicines policies and procedures. This information was up to date and easily available for staff. There was also good practice guidance.

If there was a major emergency there were procedures and contingency plans in place. Staff had plenty of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as gloves and aprons. An infection control policy and procedure were in place and staff had completed training in this area

People told us positive things about life at the home. One comment was “It’s nice.” Safe recruitment procedures were in place and staff were supported to fulfil their role with training and learning updates.

The staff and management team worked with other health and social care professionals. For example, when needed community psychiatric nurses supported people at the home.

People knew about their care plans. No one we asked said they wanted to be included in regularly reviewing and updating them with the staff. However, records showed some people had been involved in this process.

People were supported by a staff team who had built up positive relationships with people and their relatives. They understood how to meet each person’s needs and knew their wishes and preferences. There was rare use of agency staff and this was to ensure people received continuity of care.

People's privacy and dignity was respected and staff were kind and caring.

People's dietary needs were identified and met. People spoke positively about the meals.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People took part in range of activities and spoke positively about these. People were encouraged to maintain contact with relatives and friends.

There was a complaints procedure in place .People knew how to make their views known if they were unhappy in anyway.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was Good, (report published March 2017)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up - We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for 35 Cranbrook Road on our

Inspection areas



Updated 12 February 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 12 February 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 12 February 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 12 February 2020

The service was responsive .

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 12 February 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.