- Care home
Casa di Lusso
Report from 3 July 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
This assessment was carried out between 30 July 2025 and 28 August 2025. We visited the home on 30 July and 5 August 2025.
There was a strong culture of learning at Casa di Lusso, led by a dedicated registered manager and deputy manager. A new provider had purchased the company in October 2024 and were implementing changes and new systems of working. Several staff expressed dissatisfaction with the speed of the new provider’s changes and raised concerns about the communication from them. We found regular staff meetings were held, with minutes showing updates and shared learning.
The new provider’s management team were regularly present at the home, offering support to the management team during the transition. The registered manager told us that staff had found some of the changes challenging and were working with them through the transition.
A quality audit completed by the providers quality team in January 2025 identified areas for improvement. By July 2025, improvements were evident, and further actions were underway. A service improvement plan was in place to monitor and ensure completion of actions.
Staff reported a reduction in housekeeping staff hours under the new provider, impacting the cleanliness of the home. The management team said there had not been a reduction in staff hours but a redeployment of staff. We identified some malodours in some communal area but a planned external carpet cleaning resolved these. Mixed feedback was received from people and relatives regarding cleanliness at the home.
Staff received regular and relevant training, this included training for registered nurses to manage people’s clinical needs.
There was a thorough recruitment process in place, including DBS (a criminal record check for employers) checks and references, which was signed off by the registered manager. Limited agency staff were used at the home; staffing was supplemented by internal staff undertaking additional shifts and staff from another home in the group.
Staff reported reductions in staffing levels, particularly at night, impacting safety. Concerns about staffing levels had been raised with the management team, but staff felt they had not been listened to. The regional director confirmed they had listened to staff and the registered manager and deputy manager undertook night duties and spot checks to monitor the staff levels. The provider used a dependency tool (a tool calculate staffing levels needed) to assess people’s needs and the staff levels required to meet these needs. This was regularly reviewed and was usually 10% above the assessed level.
Medicines were safely managed, staff had received training and had their competency assessed regularly.
There was a clear process for reviewing accidents and incidents, ensuring appropriate staff responses and identifying trends. Staff confirmed they received feedback on incident findings.
The home was well maintained. Environmental checks were routinely completed, and staff were able to identify and record concerns. Individual risks were robustly managed. Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs)were in place and regularly updated.
The registered manager and deputy manager had a strong and collaborative working relationship. Both were committed and knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives knew who to raise concerns with and felt confident in the management team’s responsiveness.
Most people reported feeling safe. Two people raised some concerns with us and they were being addressed by the provider.
Staff were observed treating individuals with kindness and compassion and encouraged people to make choices about daily activities. However, they were not consistently supporting individuals in line with their best interests and in line with, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The providers senior management team had identified this as an area for improvement and had put in place multiple initiatives to improve staff knowledge and practice in these areas. They had added this concern to the homes service improvement plan so it was monitored.
Staff we spoke with spoke positively about the people they supported and demonstrated effective teamwork. However, some staff raised concerns about being unable to provide the level of support they felt was needed due to staffing levels. The management team had listened to staff and were actively monitoring the staff levels especially at night to ensure people were safe and asking people and relatives their views through meetings and surveys. People did not raise any concerns about staff levels.
People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and accessed GP services when needed. Health and social care professionals shared favourable comments about the quality of care provided at Casa di Lusso.
People were satisfied with the food and said alternatives were available on request. Mealtimes were pleasant and well-managed.
Visitors were welcomed without restriction. One individual expressed delight that their dog was allowed to visit, highlighting the home's inclusive and person-centred approach.
People reported limited engagement and boredom. The regional director acknowledged ongoing work was being undertaken to improve activities at the home with the activity team.
People’s care plans were person-centred and involved residents and families; the management team were working towards more outcome-focused planning.
People and relatives’ feedback was gathered through surveys and meetings. Actions were taken based on feedback, including improvements in activity provision and cleanliness.