Court House Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 6 October 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Court House Care Home provides accommodation with nursing care for up to 60 people. Accommodation is arranged across 3 separate units which are designed to cater for the needs of people with similar requirements. At the time of this inspection there were 47 people using the service. This inspection was triggered by our need to review the action the provider had taken following enforcement action carried out following our last inspection. This was a comprehensive inspection, and we reviewed all the quality statements. At the last inspection the service was rated requires improvement. The service was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care treatment and relating to good governance. Improvement was found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations. At this inspection the service has changed to good.

We found no concerns about the safety of care provided. Incidents and accidents had been reported, investigated and lessons learned shared with staff. Staff had the right skills and qualifications and were trained to carry out their roles. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Medicines were managed safely. The provider carried out regular assurance visits. Action plans were produced and this meant there was additional oversight at provider level.

Staff assessed people’s needs face to face prior to moving to the service. Care plans and risk assessments were sometimes generic however, the management team were working with staff to address this and ensure all documentation was more person centred.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas. The provider had plans for ongoing redevelopment of the environment, and we saw evidence of work completed and in progress.