Hanwell House

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 created an inclusive and positive culture at the service. People living there, their relatives and staff told us they felt the service was well managed and a good place to live and work. Comments from people and their relatives included, “I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend the home in a heartbeat”, “I know [person] is safe and well looked after” and “Staff are amazing. They can’t do enough for [person] or us as a family.”

The registered manager was also the director of the company managing Hanwell House. They had run and managed the care home for over 20 years. They were suitably experienced and undertook regular training updates. People using the service, relatives and staff found the registered manager approachable and accessible.

The registered manager was supported by a team of senior staff who undertook delegated tasks and responsibilities.

The provider had a range of policies and procedures which reflected best practice and legislation. Staff were aware of these.

The provider had procedures for staff to speak up if they had concerns or anything was wrong. Staff told us they felt comfortable raising concerns with managers. They knew they could use the provider’s procedures to speak up anonymously if needed. People using the service and relatives explained they knew how to raise concerns and felt confident doing so.

The provider supported workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. The provider ensured staff were supported through recruitment processes and their policies and procedures.

The provider’s systems for monitoring and mitigating risk had not always been effective. For example, they had not always ensured staff followed procedures relating to fire safety. Environmental checks had not identified there were potential hazards on fire escape routes. Additionally, the provider’s systems had not ensured records relating to some medicines reflected their own policies and procedures. We discussed this with the provider and were assured they took the required action to make improvements.

Nevertheless, the provider had effective systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. In other areas they had identified areas where changes were needed. They carried out a range of audits and checks to ensure procedures were followed and people received good quality care.

The registered manager responded when concerns were identified and made improvements to the service when needed.

The provider worked in partnership with external professionals. They had regular meetings with social care and health professionals to discuss people’s needs. There were regular visits from entertainers and community groups. Relatives told us they were involved and welcome at the home.

The provider made improvements and introduced innovations to the service. They had systems for using sustainable and renewable energy, such as solar panels, heat pumps, low power radiators and recycled rainwater.

The provider had developed their own computerised system for care assessments and planning as well as audits and staff training. Staff used interactive forms to update the system with information about people’s needs. The system automatically alerted the registered manager to any concerns identified through audits or changes in people’s wellbeing.

Staff completed regular training updates and had access to interactive learning through the computerised system.