Crossways Nursing Home

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to governance. The provider had not always ensured their systems were effective or ensured oversight of quality, safety and management of risks.
 

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Due to the concerns, we identified in relation to the environment, care planning, reporting of incidents and safeguarding, we could not be assured that the service always had a positive and proactive learning culture. Staff had concerns about the team's culture due to inconsistent management. For example, a staff member said, "We need a strong manager in here to sort the staff out. Communication, for starters, with the residents. There isn't any interaction." Another staff member said, "I want to see management improved, a regular and consistent manager. It feels like we just can't settle, as every time a new person comes, there are changes and new rules."

At the time of our inspection, there had been 3 changes to the Home Manager position at Crossways since March 2025. At the time of our inspection, there was no registered manager present to oversee the day-to-day running of the service. This had an impact on staff morale. A staff member told us, "It's very disconcerting. After a couple of months, each one changes things around; they all bring a little something."

However, the provider was proactively managing changes to management. The operations manager and the Provider's Group Clinical Support Nurse were present in the Service twice per week. A staff member told us, "Head office is very supportive. [Operations Manager] and [Group Clinical Support Nurse] are very supportive. Any time I need them, they are there."

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up, and their voice would be heard. All staff we spoke with confirmed they felt able to raise concerns to the provider if they needed to. A staff member said, “When there is a problem, you can go to the (Operations Manager) and speak with them, and they will help to solve any issues.”

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 did not raise concerns in relation to workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. A staff member said, “I am treated fairly. There were some issues in the past, but its ok now.”

The service did not always have good governance systems in place. They did not act on the best information available to them about risk, performance and outcomes. We identified concerns related to reporting incidents, safeguarding, care planning, and the environment. The provider had not independently identified all these concerns prior to our inspection. However, the provider responded to our concerns, which included reviewing these areas, making improvements and planning further actions they would take. We will check for sustained improvement at our next assessment.

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. There was evidence of partnership working with external health professionals, people and their relatives.

At our last inspection in 2019, we identified improvements were needed to Mental Capacity Assessments, infection control risks due to poor upkeep of some areas and governance arrangements. At this inspection we continued to find concerns in these areas. The operations manager expressed some of the concerns we identified during the inspection were as a result of not consistently having a manager in post to oversee the day to day running of the home.

However, the provider had systems in place to share learning and improvement throughout the organisation. For example, we observed examples of shared learning from inspections of their other services. This knowledge was used to review and improve their care planning and auditing systems across the network. Additionally, the provider has implemented systems to share lessons and actions from national health and safety alerts.

A relative said, “Its good place, it went a slightly downhill after all changes, but I think they are pulling the ranks now again and getting better.”