Stella Matutina Care Home

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 71 (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 staff handbook clearly outlined the service’s aims and objectives, ‘Our aim is to provide [people] with a comfortable, caring atmosphere where they can live while maintaining their individuality, and where personal rights, privacy and dignity are upheld.’ We saw evidence of this in feedback from people and relatives, whilst speaking to managers and staff, and from observations at the home.

The provider’s business plan included information about the home’s longer-term vision and strategy, acknowledging key strengths and potential risks or challenges.

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.

Staff confirmed managers had the right skills and experience, and we received positive feedback from people and relatives. One person living at the home said, “[Registered manager] is always about. She knows everything that is going on. She is doing a good job.” Another added, “Yes, [the home] is well managed.”

Managers confirmed they felt supported by the nominated individual who was, “Always on the end of the phone.” Regular in-person support was provided by the provider’s care, quality and compliance consultant.

The provider was considerate of succession planning, with staff being given the opportunity to develop. The registered manager explained how a staff member expressed an interest in becoming a senior. They were signed up to a level 3 qualification, given shadowing opportunities and covered senior shifts whilst awaiting a permanent post. The registered manager told us, “When we get really good staff, we want to invest in them and keep them.”

The provider did not always foster a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff confirmed they felt able to speak up, but we received mixed feedback about whether they always felt heard. Following our visit, we received some feedback that said, “The management are very dismissive with concerns that are raised.” Issues had also been identified in a recent staff survey about the approachability of managers at times.

The provider had taken action to introduce anonymous staff surveys, providing staff the opportunity to give open and honest responses to a range of questions. As a result of feedback, steps had been introduced to improve communication, leadership and the culture at the home, though these were not yet fully embedded.

Staff were able to speak up in ‘daily huddles’, supervisions and team meetings. The staff handbook included information about whistleblowing and guidance on how to raise a complaint.

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 equal opportunities and non-harassment policies in place. This information was included in the staff handbook for ease of access, along with details of staff member’s employment rights.

The registered manager explained reasonable adjustments in place for staff with disabilities or other protected characteristics. For example, flexible shift patterns, suitable rest periods and extended leave.

Staff confirmed they were fairly treated by managers and colleagues. A staff member said, “If you do your job well then you won’t have any problems, there is no discrimination here.”

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.

Managers conducted daily walkarounds, to check the standards of care, the safety and cleanliness of the environment, people’s dining experience and staff wellbeing. A range of checks and audits were carried out by senior staff, managers and the provider’s care, quality and compliance consultant.

The provider had recently introduced monthly governance reports to capture trends in falls, safeguarding concerns, staffing and complaints; and ensure appropriate actions were carried out to improve the quality and safety of care.

Quarterly managers meetings included discussions about topics such as maintenance, training, staff absence, catering, occupancy levels and resident feedback; issues were discussed and the necessary actions agreed.

The provider had robust plans in place for business continuity, in case of an emergency or adverse weather.

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.

The home was embedded in the local community, with good links with local church groups, schools and events. People attended monthly coffee mornings at a local church group and students from the local school visited the home or sang to people at Christmas. Two people took part in a project with the school, with students interviewing them about their experiences growing up during the war.

Managers and staff collaborated with healthcare partners such as the Hospice at Home team to share learning and improve end of life care for people.

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.

The home engaged with local universities and the continence service, taking part in research around dental screening and incontinence, to encourage creative ways of improving people’s outcomes and quality of life.

There were processes in place to drive learning, improvement and innovation and staff were given resources to help them develop skills in these areas. For example, the mental health first aiders, the IPC lead and the safeguarding and end of life champions.

A business plan included details of short-term and long-term changes planned for the home, to help improve the environment.

The registered manager was open and transparent during the inspection process and was keen to implement the necessary changes and improvements. An action plan was put in place immediately following feedback, to address concerns found during our visits.