Longhouse

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.

Leaders at the service had a detailed vision and values for the service. They promoted an open, inclusive and person-centred culture. Staff told us they felt engaged by leaders. One staff member said, “They have a wealth of knowledge. Always available to support with issues or concerns. They lead effectively.” Staff were encouraged to maintain and enhance their knowledge and skills through ongoing professional development. Leaders highlighted a strong focus on staff safety and well-being. Regular meetings were held to keep staff informed about any changes or progress within the service.

The service demonstrated a strong commitment to developing the future workforce through partnership working with local education providers. They supported T Level students (T Levels are two-year, technical qualifications in England designed for 16-to-19-year-olds after their GCSEs) by offering structured placements, providing opportunities to gain practical experience and develop skills within a real care environment. Staff acted as mentors and role models, fostering a positive learning culture. This collaborative approach reflected a forward-thinking leadership style and promoted continuous learning and innovation within the service. Leaders recognised the value of investing in future professionals and ensured appropriate support and supervision arrangements were in place.

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 told us leaders were visible, approachable and genuinely cared about them. Leaders were aware of the challenges of delivering good quality care.

Leaders demonstrated a good understanding of the service and were actively involved in the day-to-day running of the service. Staff described management as supportive and accessible. Leaders demonstrated a genuine passion in delivering high‑quality, person‑centred care. One staff member said, “The service has very compassionate and passionate managers. They are very knowledgeable and approachable.”

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

Staff confirmed they felt there was an open and honest culture. Staff knew and understood how to raise concerns and had knowledge of whistleblowing processes and the freedom to speak up.

The service had an up-to-date whistleblowing policy and procedure. Staff demonstrated an understanding of whistleblowing and could explain what they would do if they needed to escalate concerns about poor practice. A staff member told us, “Safe space to raise concerns, empower all workers to safety, hate crime, bulling, or workplace issues. Managers are supportive and reassure staff if you have a concern. I feel very happy with the management team and would not hesitate to go to them.” Leaders acted on the information appropriately, which reinforced a culture of transparency and trust within the service.

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

The service had an up-to-date equality, diversity and inclusion policy, and staff received relevant training. The staff team was diverse, and we found no evidence of bullying or discriminatory behaviour. Staff reported feeling valued and respected by both their colleagues and the management team. One staff member said, “I have no concerns in this area, and I am treated fairly and with respect.”

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.

The service operated within a structured governance framework, with established arrangements for oversight and ongoing monitoring. Regular audits of care delivery were completed, including reviews of care plans and medicines management. Audit findings were reviewed to identify areas for improvement and support the ongoing development of the service. However, while systems were in place to record and monitor accidents and incidents through the use of unique reference numbers, governance records did not always provide a clear audit trail of how actions identified through audits, quality assurance activities and service reviews were progressed and completed. As a result, it was not always evident how improvement actions were tracked to completion over time. This was discussed during the assessment. The registered manager responded promptly, implementing immediate actions and incorporating these into a detailed service improvement plan to strengthen governance processes and ensure effective oversight going forward.

Records demonstrated that performance and quality were routinely reviewed through established management systems and oversight processes.

There was a collaborative, team-based approach to monitoring and reviewing the quality of care provided. The registered manager and management team held regular meetings, to provide staff support, and ensure communication with people and staff was respectful, person-centred, and promoted positive outcomes.

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.

Staff and leaders understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership with people, other organisations and communities to achieve the best possible outcomes for people. There were established and proactive relationships with a range of external partners. These included local healthcare professionals and internal professionals within the local authority, who worked alongside the service to support people’s individual needs. We received positive comments regarding the support provided by leaders. Staff and external partners' views and concerns were encouraged, heard and acted on to shape the service and culture.

The service was working towards continuously developing and maintaining links with the local community. People were supported to participate in volunteering, employment, social groups, and community activities.

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.

Independent visitor reports took place routinely through Inclusion Gloucestershire, (a registered charity and user-led Disabled People's Organisation (DPO), run by and for people with disabilities) to further assess the quality and delivery of care. These visits included audits of key information and the production of reports for both the provider and the registered manager. This oversight supported improvements in the overall performance of the service and contributed to learning, development, and innovation.

The service worked collaboratively with a range of professionals to ensure people received appropriate, person-centred support. Staff attended regular meetings to review and discuss people’s care and treatment needs, with a focus on improving outcomes. There was a clear commitment to continuous learning and improvement. The service reviewed incidents and complaints, both internal and external, and used this information to identify learning and drive change. Lessons learned were shared with the staff team to support ongoing development. Leaders ensured staff received appropriate training to maintain high standards of care.