Saint Jude Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 8 May 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 12 January – 9 February 2026. Saint Jude is a care home and provides accommodation and personal care for up to 22 people, some whom live with dementia. At the time of the assessment 20 people were living at the home. We carried out an unannounced site visit to the home on 12 January 2026 and a further announced visit on 20 January 2026. The remainder of the assessment was conducted offsite.The assessment was prompted due to concerns we received about people’s safety. A decision was made to inspect and examine those risks. We carried out an assessment and assessed a total of 34 quality statements from all the key questions we ask, is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

We observed the environment and spoke with people living in the home and staff. We contacted people’s relatives and health and social care professionals who visited the home to gather feedback.

We found people were not always supported to manage risk appropriately. There was a lack of daily recording to consistently evidence people received adequate nutrition and hydration. Staff were not given guidance on how to monitor health and medical needs, why monitoring was necessary, what warning signs to look for, or what action to take if a person’s health began to deteriorate. Medicines were not managed safely, and people’s records did not contain enough detailed information about how and when they take their medication.

We found there were no cleaning schedules in the kitchen and the kitchen visibly dirty. We made management aware, and they were prioritising taking action in this area.

The new registered manager had devised an action plan to address areas of concern she was aware of. There was a collaborative working approach with healthcare professionals and staff cared for people, knowing their likes and preferences. We observed adequate staffing numbers. However, we were aware the registered manager was covering a lot of care shifts and kitchen shifts, filling gaps while recruitment was underway. Staff shared with us they were at times taken away from direct support due to a gap in staffing for domestic and laundry duties. New staff received an induction, and extensive e-learning courses were part of this, however, some staff commented on there being too many to be able to complete in a timely manner and this was evident in the gaps on the training matrix. The registered manager assured us they had an plan to address these gaps.

Feedback from relatives was mostly good and we received assurances from local authority safeguarding teams who continue to work with the home on matters that arise.

At our last assessment, we found the provider was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. During this assessment, although improvements were made in some areas, the provider remained in breach of this regulation.