Working at Lilbourne Court Nursing Home
Lilbourne Road, Rugby, CV23 0BB
Operated by Crosscrown Limited
36 bedsNursing homes
Workplace Score
4.1/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 4.1/10
Key Finding
"Good training and engaging activities, but no registered manager and staffing shortages created safety risks and poor oversight."
Safety & Risk
4/10
!
Risks to people's safety were not consistently managed... medicine administration was not always recorded effectively. Improvements were required to the management of covert medicines, and medicines prescribed on a 'when required' basis.
Staff Culture
5/10
!
Staff acknowledged the home had been through a challenging time due to changes in management. However, they felt the new manager was competent... some staff did not always feel listened to by the management team.
Staffing Levels
3/10
✕
People told us there were not always enough staff to meet their needs and preferences. At times, there was limited staff oversight of the communal spaces to ensure people remained safe.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Per 2020 comprehensive inspection: Records demonstrated staff were up to date with the provider's mandatory training. This included important topics such as safeguarding, mental capacity and nutrition and health. Staff spoke positively about the training provided.
Management
2/10
✕
At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post. A new manager had been in post for 6 weeks and was in the process of completing their application to become registered with us.
Programmes
5/10
!
Per 2020 comprehensive inspection: There was a planned schedule of events to promote people's emotional and social wellbeing... activities co-ordinators were committed... staff had taken their loved one ice-skating.
Points to consider
No permanent manager in post, so oversight and audits missed some risks.
At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.
Not enough staff at times, leading to long waits for help and stretched teams.
Staffing numbers did not always meet people's needs. Although we found no evidence people had been harmed, at times there was limited staff oversight of the communal spaces.
Some safety risks like skin sores and seizures not managed well, plus poor medication recording.
Risks to people's safety were not consistently managed. This included risks associated with skin breakdown and epilepsy... medicine administration was not always recorded effectively.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: April 2023
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