You are here

Crossroads Together Shropshire Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 20 September 2019

About the service

Crossroads Care Cheshire West Wirral and Shropshire is a domiciliary care agency that is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, 40 people were receiving a service from the agency. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement. As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt safe receiving a service and staff were kind and caring. Staff understood how to protect people from harm or discrimination and had access to safeguarding adult’s procedures. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs and ensure their safety. The provider operated an effective recruitment procedure to ensure prospective staff were suitable to work for the service. The staff carried out risk assessments to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. People received their medicines safely.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s needs were assessed prior to them using the service. The provider had appropriate arrangements to ensure staff received training relevant to their role. New staff completed an induction training programme.

People and their relatives consistently told us staff were caring and always showed kindness and compassion. People and where appropriate their relatives had been consulted about their care needs and had been involved in the care planning process. Staff worked in respectful ways to maintain people's privacy and dignity. Staff were motivated and demonstrated a clear commitment to providing dignified and compassionate support. People were supported in a range of activities in line with their interests and preferences. People and their relatives had access to clear complaints procedure.

There was no registered manager at the service. The area manager intended to apply for registration in due course. Whilst the care co-ordinator had carried out checks on people’s files and care documentation, there was limited evidence to demonstrate management checks and audits had been carried out during 2019 to assess the quality of the service. The nominated individual assured us the management systems and processes would be strengthened at the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated as good (published 16 February 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Inspection areas



Updated 20 September 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 20 September 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 20 September 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 20 September 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 20 September 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.