Working at Saffron House
2A High Street, Leicester, LE9 8DQ
Operated by Minster Care Management Limited
48 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
4.3/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 4.3/10
Key Finding
"Staff described an improving culture and supportive leadership, but staffing shortfalls and lack of activities led to waits for care and isolation."
Safety & Risk
4/10
!
Staff did not always demonstrate an understanding of potential restrictions for people in removing mobility aids from them once they were seated. We observed staff did not always follow best practice in supporting people to transfer or mobilise.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
Staff described an improving culture where they received better communication, support and guidance. Staff spoke of an improved, positive culture within the service and of a sense of trust and confidence in the skills of the leadership team.
Staffing Levels
3/10
✕
We identified shortfalls with the deployment of staff to ensure people were consistently provided with timely, effective care and support.
Training & Dev
4/10
!
Staff received training about how to recognise and respond to safeguarding concerns. The staff we asked demonstrated an understanding of safeguarding principles. However, we saw staff had limited understanding around restrictions in their practice.
Management
5/10
!
Staff told us they believed in the new managers ability to lead. One staff member said, “Things are better here now. There is more monitoring and everything is more professional.”
Programmes
3/10
✕
We observed many people who were sat for long periods of time in communal areas with little or no interaction from staff. This presented a risk people were isolated and excluded from mainstream activities, such as bingo.
Points to consider
Not enough staff deployed at busy times, so people wait for personal care like showers or drinks, and rooms go unsupervised up to 20 minutes.
People told us there were usually enough staff deployed to meet their needs, though many had experienced occasions when they felt the service was short staffed and had had to wait for support with personal care. We observed times when there was a lack of staff presence in communal areas.
No real activities programme, so days are mostly routine care with people sitting around and little interaction beyond tasks.
We observed many people who were sat for long periods of time in communal areas with little or no interaction from staff. Staff failed to make use of opportunities to have meaningful engagement with people outside of tasks.
Staff sometimes remove walking frames or use unsafe moving techniques, making the job riskier.
We saw staff take people’s mobility aids away from them once they were seated... We observed staff providing unsafe assistance for a person who was struggling to stand.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: December 2024
Requires improvement
Safe
!
Requires improvement
Effective
!
Requires improvement
Caring
!
Requires improvement
Responsive
!
Requires improvement
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