Francis House

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 changed to requires improvement.

There was no structured way for managers to measure and track service performance. There were insufficient systems to ensure medicines policies around transport were being followed and insufficient systems to ensure all volunteers were checked by the disclosure and barring service. The service was not using any quality improvement methodologies and was not actively part of any research.

However,

Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles. Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they applied to the work of their team. Staff felt respected, supported and valued.

This meant the service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was in breach of regulation for governance at the service.