1 Stratton Road

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider had shared their values statement with people, setting out what they should expect from the service. Staff told us the management team demonstrated the provider’s values in the way they worked. The values and how they were applied were discussed in staff meetings and staff appraisals. Staff told us the provider’s vision was to be the “most valued and trusted leader of compassionate care in the area”.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The service was being managed by the deputy manager and home manager. Staff told us the management team were knowledgeable and provided them with the support they needed to do their job well. Staff felt the leadership arrangements worked well. Comments from staff included, “The registered manager, although based across different houses comes over every day, we have chats and they always help out and are not afraid to provide direct support when needed”. The registered manager told us: “Having a presence within the homes and knowing people well is important to me – that’s why I have never applied for other jobs”. Another staff member told us “I’m able to have discussions with them whenever I need to. They are knowledgeable and explain their decisions – they are always supportive.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The service had speaking up procedures which staff were able to access if they needed. Details were shared with staff during their induction, staff meetings and 1:1 meetings. Staff told us they knew how to raise any concerns and were confident managers would listen to them and respond. Comments from staff included, “I feel we are listened to. I would raise any issues if I needed to and feel confident [managers] would act on them” and, “I have had to speak up in the past and I was well supported and managers worked to ensure that I was happy and supported in the outcome”.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The provider had processes for staff to request flexibility in their work patterns, for example to enable staff with caring responsibilities or those with health conditions to remain working. Staff were aware of these processes and told us they felt supported by the management team. The manager told us they tried to accommodate staff requests wherever possible. One member of staff was leaving the service but told us they enjoyed it so much, they had asked to work part time. The provider supported people with certificates of sponsorship. Staff told us, “The provider has been great at helping with all the issues associated with being an overseas worker such as visas and working time regulations”.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Governance systems were effective at identifying areas for improvement. The management team completed a range of audits, surveys and observations of staff practice to monitor the quality of the service. In addition to the checks staff were completing, the provider had a quality director who completed regular quality assessments of the service. These included feedback from people and their relatives, observations of staff practice, and a review of records completed by staff. Feedback was then collated and trends and themes were shared with staff and with partnership organisations. Action plans were developed to address any improvements. These systems demonstrated shortfalls were identified and actions were taken to make improvements where needed.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Managers told us they worked in close collaboration with a range of professionals to help make sure people received continuity in their care. Examples included working with healthcare professionals to support a person who had mental health problems and extensive work with the local authority to ensure people’s continuous and ongoing care was well monitored and documented. This work was reflected in people’s support plans.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

Systems for monitoring standards of support people received were used to identify areas of improvement and ensure lessons were learned when needed. This included regular audits and quality assurance checks. The manager said the provider had support systems which enabled managers to share experiences and learn from each other. The manager told us the service had focused on improving the quality of life for people by reducing restrictions wherever possible. This meant people were supported in the least restrictive way possible, promoting their independence, choice and control, continuous learning and enabling them to take positive risks which improved their overall wellbeing and quality of life.