Wansbeck 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 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.

Staff were encouraged to have an open and sharing culture and received training in equality diversity and inclusion.

Not all leaders understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. They did not always embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Not all leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively, or they did not always do so with integrity, openness and honesty.

There were staff meetings and supervisions where information was shared, and ideas explored although the staff feedback was that this was not facilitated by the manager. Staff comments included that the manager was difficult to engage with as the office door is often closed or they were not contactable. A staff member commented, “I feel the new manager is still in the early days. Although I do feel sometimes the oversight has been lacking, working from home and leaving at a ‘set time’ regardless of what is happening in the service.” We discussed this with senior management who were aware of some of the issues identified prior to the assessment, and these were being formally addressed.

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

Staff understood their responsibilities to report poor practices and ensure those in their care were treated respectfully and safely. All staff had been trained in safeguarding and whistleblowing and were confident with processes to follow if the need arose.

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 manager understood the value of a diverse staff team. Staff commented about there being a good compliment of staff. However, at times there could be limited female staff available to provide some intimate personal care.

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.

There was evidence of audits for statutory maintenance checks, care and medication records. Action plans were updated with relevant time frames for review and completion.

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.

Records evidenced appropriate healthcare referrals and appointments. Staff were confident about referring to appropriate health and social care professionals for advice. They were willing to listen, follow and review any advice given so people received the best possible care and support in a timely manner.

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.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure lessons were learnt from incidents, accidents or safeguarding concerns. These were reviewed to help identify any themes and trends which may influence a change to the practice within the home. Staff training records were regularly reviewed to ensure staff were equipped with the up-to-date knowledge and skills to provide a good level of care and support.