We carried out a review of the data available to us about Castlecroft Residential Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Castlecroft Residential Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Castlecroft Residential Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Castlecroft is registered to provide accommodation for up to 64 people. At the time of inspection there were 60 people living at the home. Castlecroft is purpose built and arranged over three floors, the first floor is for people who are more independent. The first and second floors are for people who have greater care needs and many of them were living with dementia.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service. These needed to be more robust in highlighting areas for improvement in relation to risk assessments, care plans and medication. Shortfalls that we identified during inspection had not been highlighted by their systems.
People and their relatives were positive about the care provided at Castlecroft. Our observations confirmed that staff were kind and caring towards people.
People felt safe living at the home and were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider had systems in place to minimise the risk of abuse and staff had a good knowledge and understanding of the signs of abuse and who to report concerns to.
The registered manager had taken action to ensure all staff had received the training they required to meet people’s needs. Staff told us they had completed an induction programme and had regular supervision and meetings and felt well supported.
People and their relatives told us they found the management team approachable.
This inspection took place on 19 and 20 November 2015 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 11 and 12 December 2014 we found there were two areas where the service was not meeting regulations. The provider had not ensured that suitable arrangements were in place for obtaining and acting in accordance with people’s consent. Also proper steps were not in place to ensure safe staffing numbers at all times. The provider sent us an action plan detailing what action they had taken. During this inspection we found the provider had made improvements so that the regulations were met.
Castlecroft is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 64 people. On the day of our inspection 59 people lived at the home. People living there had a range of conditions related to old age who may also have dementia. Accommodation is purpose built and arranged over three floors. The ground floor unit is for people who are more independent with lower care needs. The first and second floor units are for people who have greater care needs and many of the people were living with dementia.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service. These needed to be more robust to ensure that records relating to people’s care were well maintained.
Most people and their relatives were positive about the care provided at Castlecroft. Our observations confirmed that staff were attentive and caring towards people. We observed that improvements had been made to the way care was provided to people living on the first and second floor. Some people on the ground floor were not happy about aspects of their care. The manager took action to listen to people’s views about this and to put plans in place to make the improvements needed.
People felt safe using the service and they were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had systems in place to minimise the risk of abuse. Staff were trained to identify the possibility of abuse occurring. Staff understood their responsibility to take action to protect people from the risk of abuse and how to escalate any concerns they had.
Staff were recruited in a safe way. We found that there were enough staff to support people and meet their needs in a personalised manner.
People were supported to receive their medicines as prescribed.
The manager had taken action to ensure that all staff received the training and support they needed to ensure they had the skills to meet people’s needs.
People described the management of the home as friendly and approachable. Staff felt supported by the provider. All previous breaches of the regulations were met
Our inspection took place on the 11 and 12 December 2014. The first day was unannounced so no one knew we would be inspecting that day. We last inspected the home in December 2013. At that inspection we found no breaches of legal requirements.
Castlecroft is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 64 people. On the day of our inspection 62 people lived at the home. People living there had a range of conditions related to old age. Accommodation is purpose built and is arranged over three floors.
A manager was registered with us as required by law. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We found that staffing levels did not always ensure that people’s needs were met in the way that they wanted them to be. We identified a breach in the law concerning this. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.
Staff were not always following the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The provider had not made an application under the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for all people who may have had their liberty restricted. The requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) is a legal framework that may need to be applied to people in care settings who lack capacity and may need to be deprived of their liberty in their own best interest to protect them from harm or injury. We identified a breach in the law concerning this. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
People told us that they felt safe living at the home. There were systems in place to minimise the risk of abuse. Staff we spoke with understood that they had a responsibility to take action to protect people from the risk of harm.
People told us that they received their medication on time and in a way that they wanted. Arrangements in place ensured that medication was stored safely.
Staff knew about people’s needs. However training had not always been effective in ensuring staff have all the skills and knowledge they needed to provide safe and appropriate care to people.
People received the drink and food they needed to reduce the risk of dehydration and poor health. However, some people told us that the choice and quality of food could be improved. If people needed staff support to help them eat, this was provided.
People told us that staff listened to them and they knew how to raise concerns. The provider had a complaints system that was made available to people. However, the arrangements in place for listening and learning from concerns had not always been effective.
We found the overall quality monitoring processes required improvement to ensure that the service was run in the best interest of the people who lived there.
The majority of people we spoke with were complimentary about the home. One person said, 'I like it here.' Another person said, 'The staff are all lovely.' One relative said, 'They are well cared for. I never worry about them.' Another relative said, 'The staff look after them well.' However some people we spoke with told us that agency staff had not helped them quickly in the past.
Care plans were personalised and risk assessments were in place. Staff had the information they needed to meet people's identified needs. People's needs had been assessed by a range of external health professionals so that their health care needs were monitored and met.
Staff were trained and knew how to protect the people living there so that they were safeguarded from the risk of harm.
There were sufficient suitably qualified staff employed that were supported and supervised to meet people's needs and keep them safe.
Audit systems were in place for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. This meant that the service was being run in the best interests of the people who lived there.