Craven Nursing Home Limited

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

The registered manager 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. Staff consistently described the service as a positive place to work and told us they would recommend it as a good place to both work and live. Leaders promoted a calm, respectful and homely environment. People and relatives told us the home felt, “lovely” and it was “fabulous.” Other comments included “staff were respectful and thoughtful”. People said there were always staff around and they did not have to wait long when they needed help, including at night. Staff described a strong team ethos and spoke positively about working together to provide high quality‑ care and meaningful activities. Leaders used regular meetings, supervision and informal “open door” conversations to reinforce expectations and values, and relatives said they felt welcome and included.

The registered manager was capable, compassionate and an inclusive leader who modelled the values of the service, were highly visible and were consistently praised by staff, people and relatives. Staff repeatedly described the registered manager as “friendly”, “approachable” and “supportive.” Several staff told us they genuinely enjoyed working at the home, with one saying “There is a friendly atmosphere and camaraderie” and another member of staff telling us how well supported they felt returning from a period of absence. People and relatives spoke with consistent warmth about the registered manager. Relatives told us they knew exactly who the registered manager was, with one saying, “their door is always open, I never feel I am troubling them if I want to speak”. Several people said the service had “improved since the current manager arrived”, reflecting their confidence in the leadership. Staff described strong clinical and managerial oversight from the registered manager, particularly around medication safety. Evidence showed detailed audits, clear protocols and responsive action. Staff reported receiving regular supervision, training access and encouragement to develop. Nurses told us they valued meetings with the deputy to share good practice, and others said leaders had created an open, supportive culture where one member of staff told us, “You can go to the registered manager about anything – work or personal” and another said, “Work is not all about money. It is about being valued.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us there was no blame culture and described a “learning” environment where incidents and complaints were used to improve practice. The provider is visible at the service and staff felt confident to approach both the provider and registered manager if they had any concerns. People and relatives told us they had never needed to complain but were confident any concerns would be taken seriously and one relative told us they were confident any complaint would be, “Attended to very quickly and thoroughly.”

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 promoted workforce equality, diversity and inclusion and supported staff to deliver person centred care. Staff from different roles spoke positively about being valued and described the service as a good place to work, with supportive colleagues and fair access to training and development.

The registered manager always had exceptionally strong governance, management and sustainability arrangements which supported safe, high quality and person‑centred care. The registered manager’s oversight was consistently described as effective, reliable and proactive. Staff told us governance systems were extremely robust with the provider telling us the management of risk within the service were “spot on” People and relatives consistently praised how well the home was run. People described staff and manager as, “lovely, respectful and thoughtful”, with one person saying “I couldn’t have picked a better place myself” when speaking about the leadership and culture of the service. Relatives described the registered manager as proactive, responsive and consistently supportive of people and their relatives. Staff at all levels understood the service’s governance systems and described the registered manager as an exceptional leader. Staff could explain recent improvements made by the registered manager which had resulted from audits, including changes to medicines protocols and mealtime practice. The registered manager demonstrated strong commitment to improvement through investment in training, strong relationships with external partners and the staff team, and ongoing improvements informed by data, audits and staff feedback.

Staff 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.The provider worked well with partners and the local community to support people’s health, wellbeing and quality of life. Staff and relatives told us professionals such as GPs, speech and language therapists and other health practitioners visited regularly and that staff were proactive in seeking advice when people’s needs changed. There was a structured approach to GP input, including weekly telephone rounds and monthly in person visits, which supported continuity of care and timely review of medicines and clinical needs. Leaders worked closely with the pharmacy provider, for example when reviewing with the view to reduce unnecessary medication. The local authority and other professionals reported positive relationships with the service and told us they had no concerns. The service was well integrated into the local community through regular outings using the minibus to places such as garden centres, parks and shopping centres as well as individual trips arranged around what mattered to people. Activities such as church services, fairs, visiting entertainers and animal visits further supported community links and social connection.The service had actively engaged in a wide range of community initiatives, including annual summer fetes, the “Adopt a Grand‑Friend” scheme, charity collections such as the “Love Grace” handbag appeal, and participation in Care Home Open Week. These projects consistently strengthened community links and raised funds for local charities and residents’ welfare.

The registered manager 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. Staff and leaders described a “no blame” approach where incidents, complaints and near misses were seen as opportunities to reflect and improve. Incidents were recorded, investigated and discussed in daily huddles, staff meetings and supervision. Leaders used reflective accounts, competency checks and updated protocols when things went wrong.