- Care home
Shawcross Care Home
Assessment report published 29 September 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
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.
People's experience of this service
People and their relatives gave positive feedback about the service.
People and their relatives said staff ensured people’s safety. A relative said [They] are very safe here; I haven’t experienced any concerns about [their] safety. [They] have a mat next to their bed on the floor and the security is very good.” People and relatives were impressed by their experience of the referral process and the subsequent transition to the service. They explained how the provider helped to ease the transition with lots of information provided to them. They felt welcomed by the staff and the leadership team instantly. Everyone spoken with, were confident they could raise concerns about their own/their relatives care with no hesitation; they felt the management team had an open-door policy. Relatives told us staff understood people’s needs and risks well; a relative said “They have done all the risk assessments, applied for a DoLS. [They]have been given cot rails for safety at night…They provide a wheelchair to get [them] around…They also raise [their] legs each day to reduce the swelling.” People and relatives had no concerns regarding the environment, the cleanliness of the home or the administration of medicines. Relatives told us they felt there could be more staff, for example a relative said, “There are not enough staff during the day and at weekends. Because residents tend to like staying in their rooms, the staff are going from one room to another all the time and sometimes residents need two staff to support them at a time.”
People and relatives gave mixed feedback in relation to being involved in the care planning process. Some relatives knew the person had a care plan which had been discussed with them, whilst others said they did not know what a care plan was. People and relatives said the service acted quickly to make appropriate referrals to services when people needed additional support. They were happy with the food which was provided and said they were consistently asked if they wanted a drink. People and relatives said the staff offered them healthier choices and encouraged good physical and mental wellbeing. One person said, “They offer healthy choices all the time, the food is nutritious, and they offer me plenty of time to ensure I am washed appropriately.” People told us staff always sought consent before any task.
People and relatives said staff were caring, they respected their privacy and dignity, and they allowed people time. People and relatives said, “The staff are wonderful”, “They are kind; I can’t fault them” and “I can’t speak highly enough of the staff, they are wonderful with [them]”. People and relatives said staff understood them well and they used this knowledge to support them in activities personal to them.
People and relatives felt there were enough activities for people to engage with in the home. They felt there was a continuity of care, with regards to the day staff being similar. Relatives said they were kept up to date by the registered manager or the staff and this was normally done in person or over the telephone. People and relatives said they would feel confident in raising concerns or complaints to the registered manager, but did not feel they would need to. People and their relatives said they were treated equally and fairly and did not have any concerns regarding discrimination within the home. People and relatives felt staff considered people’s goals and aspirations for the future.
People and relatives were happy with how the home was led. They felt the registered manager was accommodating of their needs. A relative said “I am very happy with the home…The manager is professional, and I trust her completely. Care genuinely oozes from the staff when they are providing care.”