Broadmead Rest 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 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.

Relatives were positive about the culture created by the management team, who they felt were open and approachable. The manager said they were developing plans to focus on greater community involvement, with more opportunities for people to take part in activities outside the home. The manager said they had plans to increase focus on reflective practice, to learn from mistakes in a no blame culture, and ensure there was continuous improvement. The management team told us the provider was supportive in implementing this vision. Comments from staff included, “The managers are focused on high quality, dignified care. The team share the same values and the provider is supportive."

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 new manager who was applying to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. People and relatives told us they knew the management team and were confident they would resolve problems raised with them. Relatives were looking forward to a scheduled meeting with the new manager to hear more about their plans. People felt the service was well managed.

Staff told us the management team were open and approachable. Comments from staff about the management team included, “supportive”, “focused” and “knowledgeable.”

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

Staff told us there were effective systems for them to raise concerns and they felt confident action would be taken if they used them. Information about how to raise concerns was displayed in staff rest areas. Records demonstrated staff were encouraged to raise concerns during team meetings and individual meetings with their supervisor, which were followed up.

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 service employed a diverse workforce, including staff who moved to the UK specifically to work for the provider through the sponsorship scheme. The management team supported staff to make reasonable adjustments to their working patterns where needed, to support them to remain at work. For example, changes to accommodate caring responsibilities and support for staff to observe their religious and cultural needs. Staff knew the provider’s policies and told us they felt very well supported by the management team.

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 management team completed audits, surveys and observations of staff practice to monitor the quality of the service. The provider’s directors maintained regular oversight of the service through monitoring of actions from the home’s improvement action plan. These included feedback from people and their relatives, observations of staff practice, and a review of records completed by staff. Actions from the audits were assigned to staff with a timescale for completion. The provider was implementing a new electronic oversight tool, to give senior managers easier access to documents to monitor progress on actions.

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 manager told us they worked with other professionals to help make sure people received continuity in their care. Relatives gave examples of the service working in partnership with other agencies, including the GP and specialist nurses, to help meet people’s needs. Health and social care professionals gave positive feedback about their experience of working with the service to meet people’s needs.

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 care were used to identify areas of improvement and lessons learned. This included regular audits, quality assurance checks and feedback from people and relatives. The manager was a member of management forums and professional bodies, which they used to share learning from other services.