St Ann's Lodge 2

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 leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care. The service was, on the whole, consistently managed and well-led. However, we identified management oversight of meeting legal requirements needed improvement.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Managers had clear responsibilities and roles and were accountable for the provision of safe, effective, high quality care to people. They used governance systems to undertake regular checks and audits of the quality and safety of care and support provided to people. Outcomes from checks and audits were used to make any changes required and support staff to improve their working practices.

However, management oversight of the service’s compliance with regulatory requirements was not always effective. We found managers had not sent information to CQC about recently authorised applications to deprive people of their liberty, which they are required to do so. We discussed this with managers during out site visit. We were assured they understood their responsibility for notifying CQC of these events and that these omissions were a genuine oversight on their part. After our site visit, they made sure all the relevant information was sent to CQC. In addition, managers amended monitoring systems to include better prompts for when this information should be sent to CQC at the required time.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.