Eachstep Lockwood Care 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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was not always consistent, but this was being addressed.

The service was no longer in breach of legal regulation in relation to robust governance systems.

This service scored 57 (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.

A vision and values statement was in place, available to staff and discussed in staff meetings. The statement was also attached to the supervision document and visited in each supervision session with staff.

Staff understood the challenges the service was facing in terms of issues prior to the home closing and reopening under a different name. One member of staff spoke about “getting the faith back” of partners involved in the service. The management team were working hard to make sure learning was taken from historical issues but were enthusiastic about growing the service in line with their vision and values. They were looking at how links with local community could be forged.

Good culture was promoted through staff training, monitoring and getting feedback from people using the service and their families and friends.

People using the service were involved in promoting standards at the service through the committee, meetings and feedback.

Not all members of the provider’s management team had understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. This was evidenced in the failure to identify issues with the environment before the service re-opened. At the time of this assessment there was a newly appointed manager in post who was being supported by an area manager. The management team at the service demonstrated their skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively and did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The provider had not made sure that all areas of the service were at a standard that people moving into a care home should expect. An audit of bedrooms completed by a previous manager of the service which said bedrooms were fit for occupancy had not been checked by a senior member of the management team and issues were only identified when the current management team came into post. This was evidenced in only 6 bedrooms being ready for occupation which restricted people’s choice and the lack of safe and appropriate bathing and showering facilities. We were reassured that the management team at the service were addressing these matters and work was in progress.

CQC had been made aware of some issues relating to the provider accepting people to live at the service for whom staff did not have the skills to support. Our discussions with the management team during the assessment gave assurances that people would only be offered a place at the service following thorough assessment processes, confirmation their needs could be met by staff and that the environment was appropriate.

The manager had scheduled an afternoon each week when they made sure they were available to anybody wanting to speak with them.

People, visitors and staff all had confidence in the service’s management team. We observed managers to have a good knowledge of, and relationship with, people living at the service.

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

Systems were in place for people living at the service so that staff and visitors could express their opinions about the service. This included the manager’s open afternoons, residents’ and staff meetings, residents’ committee and a suggestions box for people to anonymously make suggestions for improvement or raise concerns.

People, their visitors and staff said they could speak with the manager if they had any concerns.

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 provider had a diverse workforce in place, and staff had received their training in equality and diversity. Staff were able to choose their working pattern which managers hoped would promote staff commitment and good work life balance for staff. Managers explained that staff surveys had not yet been sent out due to the time the service had been open but hoped staff would take advantage of other available channels to make their opinions known.

Recruitment processes were inclusive, and we saw an example of this.

Issues in the early days of the service re-opening had not always been identified through the provider’s governance systems. This included a number of environmental issues which were identified by the local authority infection prevention and control team.

The management team in place at the time of our assessment were working to an action plan to address all identified issues. There was an audit system in place, the results of which were fed into the action plan for any actions needed. We were able to see evidence of early progress being made and the management team gave assurances that this would be continued.

The suggestions box as a means of providing anonymous feedback and information for people to raise concerns externally had been put in place as a result of the dignity in care audit completed with a person using the service.

The provider did not always focus on learning from previous identified issues within the service in order to make sure improvements were made.

Issues identified by the current management team in relation to the suitability of bedrooms, safety and availability of bathing and showering facilities and issues identified by the local authority infection prevention and control team demonstrated that the provider had failed to fully learn from past issues within the service. However, this was being addressed by the current management team and the development and progression of a comprehensive action plan demonstrated a positive attitude to learning and an intention to improve the service for people.

Learning had also taken place from feedback from people living at the service.