Working at Jane House
Effingham Road, Crawley, RH10 3HZ
Operated by Adelaide Care Limited
8 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
5.0/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 5.0/10
Key Finding
"Consistent skilled staffing, good training and activities, but poor management oversight and safety risks hold it back."
Safety & Risk
4/10
!
People were not always supported by robust risk management. For example, a person who was prescribed medicines to manage seizures did not have a care plan or risk assessment in place to support their epilepsy safely. Staff were not recording regular checks on people when restrictive interventions were being used.
Staff Culture
5/10
!
Staff felt supported by the registered manager and provider and enjoyed working at Jane House. Staff told us, “We are like a big family, I love my job.” However, there were inconsistencies in the culture of the service and some staff did not show regard or respect for working within people’s homes.
Staffing Levels
6/10
✓
There were enough staff to support people well. People were supported by a consistent team of skilled staff who knew people, their needs, and preferences. Staff covered gaps in the rota to minimise the need for agency staff.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff told us they received a comprehensive induction and training. This included approved training to support people with a learning disability and autistic people. Staff were positive about training available to them. They said, “The training is really good,” and gave them the skills and knowledge needed.
Management
3/10
✕
Management oversight of risk and care records was not robust. There was a failure to identify and mitigate the risks we identified during our assessment. The registered manager visited the service three days a week and relied on senior staff for day-to-day oversight, but some senior staff did not identify poor practices.
Programmes
6/10
✓
People had individual activity plans which reflected their diary of social, recreational and interest pursuits. People safely took part in things they enjoyed such as swimming, bowling, cinema, and horse-riding. People used the garden constantly for exercise, trampoline, bike riding and ball games.
Points to consider
The manager only visits three days a week from a head office and oversight misses risks and poor staff practices spotted by inspectors.
The registered manager told us they visited the service three days a week. Outside of this time they worked from the providers head office in Cambridgeshire. Senior staff in charge of the service did not identify staff practices seen by CQC inspectors.
Risk management has gaps like missing plans for epilepsy medication and poor recording of safety checks during restrictions.
a person who was prescribed medicines to manage seizures did not have a care plan or risk assessment in place to support their epilepsy safely... Staff were not recording regular checks on people when restrictive interventions were being used.
Some staff don't show respect in people's homes and most don't know the company values.
Some staff did not show regard or respect for working within people’s homes. There was an absence of honesty or integrity from these staff... Staff were unable to tell us what the core values of the service were.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: October 2024
Requires improvement
Safe
!
Requires improvement
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Requires improvement
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