Croft House Rest Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.This meant people were not always supported and treated with dignity and respect; or involved as partners in their care.
Please note we did not review Kindness, compassion and dignity, Treating people as individuals or Responding to people’s immediate needs at this inspection. Information has been incorporated from our last inspection of the service.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The provider did not promote people’s independence, so people did not know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.
People did not always have access to meaningful activities to support their independence, health and wellbeing. There were no dedicated activities staff employed at the time of our inspection, and staff did not have the capacity to lead regular activities alongside their caring responsibilities. Staff raised concerns about the impact this had on people’s moods and wellbeing. A staff member said, “There’s nothing to do. I think that’s why [person] gets as frustrated as they do. They’re bored, and [people] get sick of each other.” There was little evidence of meaningful activities in records we reviewed.
People told us they were given choices in some aspects of their lives; but they could not always go out when they wanted to and there was only 1 option at mealtimes. A person told us, “There’s not always a choice at mealtimes, they have to keep costs to a limit.”
However, people had regular access to their friends and relatives. We observed several relatives visiting the home during our inspection.
Since our feedback, the provider has recruited an activities coordinator to improve access to social opportunities and support people's wellbeing.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The provider did not always promote the wellbeing of their staff.
People did not always receive safe, effective, person-centred care as the provider did not always recognise or meet the wellbeing needs of staff. Staff were often required to work 15 hour shifts and due to staffing levels, were not always afforded regular breaks. A staff member told us, “I personally think shifts are too long. There’s no rationale.”
Staff were not given regular opportunities to provide feedback, or suggest ways to improve the service or staff experience due to the lack of supervisions and team meetings.
However, staff felt well supported by colleagues and managers if they were struggling at work.