Carr Croft Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement.

This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 55 (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 treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. Staff did not always treat colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

During our assessment inspectors observed an incident where a person had an episode of incontinence and was visibly upset. The staff member who was supporting this person did not show empathy towards them or respect for the person’s privacy. When observing other staff members, they were kind and caring in their interactions with people. People and their relatives told us staff were kind and respectful towards them. 

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Care plans lacked detail and were not always person centred. Inspectors observed care and support, particularly at busy periods such as personal care in the mornings, was task-focused rather than person-centred. Inspectors observed staff did not always respond to people and communicate in a dementia friendly way.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

For example, during mealtime observations no choice was offered at the time of the meal. When we explored this further the manager told us that this is because the meal options were offered the day before. When asked if people always understood the options available to them, the manager told us, no but they check people’s care plans for likes or dislikes or speak to family and make the decision for them using this information. People were not supported to make their own decisions by using pictures or show plates.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Although people told us staff usually came when they asked for help, we identified occasions where people waited for support. Feedback from people confirmed sometimes they had to wait for their needs to be met which caused them concern and discomfort and did not always support dignified care. One person told us, “Only one complaint is I’m incontinent and I call them [staff], and they can’t always come, I can’t control it and it is embarrassing, I understand that they are busy”.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff spoke positively about the manager’s visible and supportive leadership, including open communication and regular supervision and meetings.