Cressington Court Care 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 did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 40 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. We saw one visiting health professional performing their tasks in the communal lounge offering no privacy or dignity to the person. Staff did not intervene to prevent this practice. We observed throughout the assessment people appearing dishevelled, multiple people were not wearing appropriate footwear, wearing only socks, or none at all meaning they were barefoot. We observed multiple people throughout the day wearing pyjamas/pyjamas bottoms and we found no personalisation in people’s bedrooms.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. Poor record-keeping, communication gaps and inconsistent staff familiarity meant care was not delivered in a reliable person-centred way. Staff could not always rely on care plans to guide them in providing care which reflected each person’s identity, history and preferences.

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. The provider could not be assured they were considering what was important to people.We saw an example in the daily flash meetings and a planned activity for one day which stated, dancing to old music. There was no consideration for physical, mental, social, and creative activities which could have supported people to live well with dementia and improve their wellbeing at Cressington Court Care Home. Leaving people at risk of social isolation.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Environmental and staffing constraints meant staff were not always able to meet needs promptly. For example, we saw on the ground floor communal lounge one permanent staff member attempting to interact with 17 people whilst agency staff attempted to get the attention of permanent staff without success. The inspection team gained the attention of the staff member so they could support the agency staff. Such inconsistencies had a direct impact on people’s comfort, dignity and wellbeing, indicating the provider needed to improve how it organises staff and responds to urgent support needs.

The provider did always not care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. We observed on several occasions the management team station themselves in the manager’s office. This office was away from people and staff meaning the management did not have daily oversight of what was happening at Cressington Court Care Home. We observed throughout the assessment the home manager, chief executive and quality assurance staff leave the manager’s office to get a drink or food then return to the office. We saw the provider had completed ‘you said, we did’ exercise and staff had highlighted they would like to be rewarded for their hard work. The provider’s response was to implement a staff appreciation scheme which included gifts. We observed staff to be rushed and nervous throughout. The provider could not be assured they were considering the wellbeing of their staff in an appropriate and meaningful way.