Working at Clayton House
Long Lane, Huddersfield, HD8 9PR
Operated by WCG Clayton Ltd
60 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
3.9/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 3.9/10
Key Finding
"Staff feel supported with good training, but no permanent manager and staffing shortages cause waits for care and weak oversight."
Safety & Risk
4/10
!
Some areas of the service required more thorough cleaning... slings, equipment used for moving and handling of people, had not been robustly checked and there were inconsistencies within the provider’s monthly check records.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
Staff felt supported and spoke positively about the leadership team. Comments included, “The manager is very approachable and we have a good team, we all support each other,”
Staffing Levels
2/10
✕
We identified a continued breach of regulation in relation to staffing. We found there were not always enough staff to meet people’s needs and people sometimes had to wait for support.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff training was in place and reflected good compliance. Where compliance was lower for 1 aspect of training, a session had been arranged and staff were already booked to attend.
Management
2/10
✕
There continued to be no registered manager in place at the service and the manager who was newly appointed is no longer employed.
Programmes
3/10
✕
The manager told us that the activity co-ordinator would previously go round and visit people who were unable to leave their rooms, however they had recently left, and the service was looking to recruit a replacement.
Points to consider
No permanent manager in place after the new one left, so leadership feels unstable and oversight is weak.
There continued to be no registered manager in place at the service and the manager who was newly appointed is no longer employed.
Not enough staff so people often wait for help like changing and staff are rushed and task-focused instead of chatting.
We found there were not always enough staff to meet people’s needs and people sometimes had to wait for support. Staff were task orientated and did not always have time to chat to people.
No activities coordinator right now so some residents are bored with little to do and no fresh air.
The activity co-ordinator... had recently left... Some people remained isolated in their rooms with little to no evidence of one to one activity being offered to them.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: April 2024
Inadequate
Safe
✕
Inadequate
Effective
!
Requires improvement
Caring
!
Requires improvement
Responsive
✕
Inadequate
Management Quality
Well-led: Inadequate
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews