Archived: The Chestnuts

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 68 (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 clear mission statement which was communicated to staff. The policies and procedures at the service were written to promote a culture focused on learning and improvement.

Staff understood the values of the provider and were able to communicate them to us.

The new manager had introduced a renewed purpose to staff, with many recognising improvements were needed to ensure people received a better quality of care.

We found staff demonstrated a more cohesive culture we observed teamwork in action when we were at the home.

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.

There has been a notable improvement in leadership following the appointment of a new manager, widely praised by several family members for being responsive, transparent, and dedicated.

Staff spoke positively about the new manager. Comments included “[name of manager] has displayed good experience and skills”, “calm and always give staff time with any concern” and “They can be approached at any time.”

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

Relatives appreciated the open communication channels and felt confident to raise concerns when needed, often via email or directly with the manager. They were encouraged to speak up and feel reassured their concerns would be listened to.

Staff told us they knew about freedom to speak up and would have the confidence to do so if needed. One member of staff told us “I always feel listened to.”

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.

Staff had the opportunity to move into roles with greater responsibility. Some members of staff had worked at the home for many years. There was a renewed sense of purpose and morale among staff, which had a positive impact on the care provided. It was evident staff felt more valued, and there was a shared commitment to continuous improvement. Staff had access to a 24-hour confidential counselling service.

We noted schemes were in place to praise and acknowledge staff.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability. They used these to manage and deliver sustainable care, treatment and support. However, they did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes. For example, we found ongoing breaches of the legal regulation in respect of ensuring people were protected from harm, in particular improvements were required in the management of risk and maintaining accurate records.

Since the last inspection the home had been managed by an interim manager. They had fully adopted an improvement approach.

Daily checks were carried out either by the manager or senior staff which included checking on cleanliness, staff adherence to dress code and interaction between people and staff. We could see where action was needed, it was carried out immediately.

Since the last inspection we received the legally required notifications about events at the home in a timely manner. The service was no longer in breach of regulations relating to this.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership with external parties such as community healthcare services. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

People were supported to continue to be part of the community. People were given the opportunity to attend garden centres, theatre, coffee shops and restaurants. In addition, the home visited other residential care homes under the Forget-me-not scheme, which aims to connect people with others from the local community. It was clear from feedback from people and photos taken these events were well-organised and appreciated.

On the day of the site visit we observed a very engaging session where birds of prey had been brought into the home. We observed people were clearly captivated by the attending bird handler. It was clear their knowledge of the birds was appreciated by people who were keen to ask questions.

Relatives told us they welcomed the activities offered to their family member and always looked at social media to see what they had been doing.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

Since our last inspection we have noted improvements in the governance at the home, however, we found improvements were still required to ensure best practice was followed. For instance, we found delays in action being taken when issues were highlighted.

We found an improved attitude from management and staff to make the required changes. The manager told us “When there are lessons to be learnt within the service, we take them very seriously and try to learn from them to understand where, as a team we need to improve or change something as we are committed to continue improving the service.” We found this to be the case.

The whole staff team we spoke with were determined to make the experience of people living at the home safer and better quality. The manager told us “We are committed to ensuring that residents live safely, with dignity, and with opportunities for a full and meaningful life.” The systems the manager had put in place supported this.