• Care Home
  • Care home

Catchpole Court

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Walnut Tree Lane, Sudbury, Suffolk, CO10 1BD (01787) 882023

Provided and run by:
Elmwood Care Homes Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Requires improvement

Updated 8 April 2025

We carried out this assessment from 9 April 2025 to 7 May 2025 when formal feedback was provided.
Catchpole Court is a care home providing accommodation, nursing and personal care for up to 66 older people, some of whom living with dementia and/or have nursing needs. People were accommodated across 2 units Constable and Gainsborough.
During our assessment we found improvements were needed in the management of people’s medicines, the management of risks associated in the planning and monitoring of people’s care and support and the environment for people living with dementia.
Risks associated with people’s care had not always been identified. Risk assessments were not always up to date and clear. This put people at risk as staff did not always have the guidance needed to keep people safe.
The management team did not ensure robust records of staff training had been maintained. Staff told us they received regular supervision assessing their work performance and staff meetings to aid communication.
Improvements were needed to the environment to enhance the experience of people living with dementia and enable them to orientate around the building.
People had opportunities to participate in some activities and relatives told us they could visit their loved ones freely. Some people told us staff sought their consent before assisting them to meet their needs; however, we observed incidents where staff did not always support people in a person-centred manner and care plans did not provide sufficient person-centred information to ensure care provided was responsive to meet people’s needs.
Feedback from staff and relatives regarding staffing levels was mixed, some people felt there were enough staff and others disagreed. The oversight of staff training needed improvement to ensure robust records were maintained.
The provider was in breach of regulation in relation to assessing the risks to people’s safety, the management of medicines, consent to care and treatment and governance of the service due to systems in place not being sufficiently robust to ensure adequate oversight.
The management team were transparent and responsive to the shortfalls we identified and told us they were committed to making the improvements necessary.


In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.
 

People's experience of the service

Updated 8 April 2025

People told us they were generally happy living in the service, and they spoke positively about the staff, telling us they were kind and friendly. Most people told us they were offered choices in relation to meals, personal care, and that they felt safe. However, other people and their relatives told us more staff were needed, and their loved ones were not always provided with the personal care support needed such as access to regular baths and showers. One relative told us, “It is a clean home, staff very friendly, the activity lady keeps us up to date and tells us how [person’s relative] is. However, we have had some concerns about [person’s relative’s] access to a shower. [Person’s relative’s] hair is greasy, and we have spoken to staff about this on more than one occasion. I am not sure they are having their showers, and their fingernails are really dirty; I have to do this myself. I should not have to do their nails, sometimes they are in clothes that are not theirs.” Another relative said, “Communication is not too bad, I had to speak to staff as I thought that [person’s relative] had a chest infection and urine infection on arrival to the home and they said they would keep an eye on them. However, the Nurse did not check their vitals but only checked a week later and [person’s relative] had a chest and a urine infection needing antibiotics.”
Comments from people who use the service included, “The care staff are excellent, possibly not enough of them.” “It is pretty good here, the food is good, it is clean, I’ve got no complaints, staff are kind, I stay in my room, this is my choice.” And “I have not been here for long, I like the company, everything is clean, there are always staff close by. Mornings are busy and you may need to wait for staff to help but on the whole pretty good.”