Shawcross Care Home

Date of assessment: 21 March to 12 April 2026. The service is a residential nursing home providing support to older people and people living with dementia. The home contains 2 separate units: residential and nursing. The home can accommodate a total of 50 people. At the time of assessment 44 people were living there.

The assessment was completed to check if improvements had been made following our last assessment in July 2025. Following that assessment, we took regulatory action due to identifying breaches of the legal regulation relating to governance and record keeping.

At this assessment, whilst some improvements had been made, the provider remained in breach of the legal regulation relating to governance and record keeping. The provider was also in breach of 2 further legal regulations relating to the management of medicines, staff training and support. Some care records and risk assessments lacked detail, contained incorrect or contradictory information with current needs not always easy to identify. Monitoring charts had not been completed consistently. Whilst audits had identified the majority of issues we noted, improvements had either yet to be made or had not been sustained. Medicines had not always been managed safely. Completion of staff supervision and appraisal was inconsistent. Training completion rates were variable and mandatory training in learning disability and autism had not been provided, as required under current legislation.

Accidents and incidents had been documented, along with immediate actions taken. However, information on outcomes and lessons learned was limited. Safeguarding concerns had been reported to the local authority and logged on a spreadsheet, which also contained limited to no details of outcomes and lessons learned. Staff were recruited safely. The provider’s dependency tool indicated enough staff were deployed to meet needs, although people, relatives and staff provided mixed views about this.

Fluid charts were kept, although care records did not contain guidance on how much people should drink. Food intake had also been monitored; these were relatively detailed although they did indicate one person may have been given food’s their care plan said to avoid.

Care records varied in quality and consistency, with some individuals’ care plans being detailed and easy to follow, whilst others were confusing, lacked detail or were contradictory. Staff knew what person-centred care meant and how to provide this. People told us they were treated as individuals.

A new auditing and governance system had recently been introduced, though this was not yet fully embedded into practice. Action plans had been used to detail areas for improvement and how these would be achieved. However, timeframes for improvement often extended over several months, rather than being short term achievable goals.

There had been a number of changes to management since we last assessed the home in July 2025. The previous registered manager had left not long after that assessment, the deputy had stepped up on an interim basis, before a new registered manager started at the end of the year. These changes had understandably impacted on consistency of leadership. Despite this people and relatives felt the home was well run and had no concerns with the care provided.

Date of Assessment: 29 July to 19 August 2025.

The service is both a residential and nursing care home providing support to older people living with dementia and a separate wing for people living with other care needs, including Parkinson’s Disease, strokes and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). The service has capacity to support 50 people and at the time of the inspection, 48 people were being supported.

The provider did not always have effective oversight of accidents and incidents. The provider did not always share safeguarding concerns with the CQC and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications were not followed up with the local authority in a timely manner. People did not always receive the care which was outlined in their care plans. The provider did not always ensure staff records contained all the information, which was required, and staff’s appraisal compliance rate was low. The provider did not always make sure medicines were safely administered. However, the provider ensured it was safe for people when they came into and out of the service. The environment was safe, and equipment was well maintained. The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection well.

People had assessments when they entered the home, and these were reviewed monthly. Staff teams worked well together and with external professionals. People were supported to live healthier lives. The provider ensured people gave their consent to their treatment. However, evidence-based care and treatment was not always delivered in line with best practice guidance.

The provider ensured people were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion, they were treated as individuals, and they had independence, choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing. Most staff felt they were supported by the management team.

People had access to accurate, up to date information which was tailored to their needs. The provider ensured people and relatives could share their feedback and ideas about the service. People were able to access the care and support without unnecessary barriers. People were supported to plan for important changes in their life, including end of life care. However, the provider did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment.

The leadership team had failed to identify some of the areas of concern raised on the inspection. The provider did not have appropriate governance systems in place and did not share information about risk securely with the CQC when appropriate to do so. The provider had a clear vision and strategy for the service. Staff felt comfortable they could speak up if they had concerns. The provider valued diversity and worked towards a fair and inclusive culture. The provider had good relationships with professionals locally. Leaders were compassionate and inclusive.

We found breaches of the legal regulations in relation to failure to notify and good governance.

In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.

We have also asked the provider for an action plan in response to concerns found at this assessment.