Vecta 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 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 75 (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. There was a positive and inclusive culture within the service. Staff described good teamwork and spoke positively about working at the home. Staff told us they felt valued and supported. They said they would recommend the service as a place to work or would be happy for a family member to receive care there. Staff across different roles shared a commitment to providing person-centred care and support.

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. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Leaders demonstrated the skills, knowledge and integrity needed to lead the service effectively. Staff consistently described the registered manager as approachable, supportive and responsive, and told us they felt able to seek advice, raise concerns and discuss ideas for improvement.

Throughout the assessment, the management team were open and transparent when areas requiring further review were identified. They responded positively to feedback, provided information when requested and took action where improvements were needed. The registered manager was relatively new in post but had already implemented systems to strengthen oversight and quality assurance, providing confidence that the service would continue to develop and improve.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. There was an open culture where people, relatives and staff felt able to raise concerns, provide feedback and share ideas for improvement. Staff understood how to escalate concerns and were able to describe how they would report safeguarding issues, including to external organisations if required.

Staff told us they felt comfortable speaking with managers and were confident concerns would be listened to and acted upon. The service had additional arrangements in place to support speaking up, including a Speak Up Champion and staff engagement processes. People and relatives knew how to raise concerns or ask questions and told us they felt able to do so. Feedback indicated they were confident matters raised would be taken seriously.

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 promoted a culture that was inclusive, fair and respectful. Staff from a range of backgrounds told us they felt supported and valued within their roles and did not raise concerns about discrimination or unfair treatment. Staff described positive working relationships with colleagues and managers and spoke positively about the support available to help balance work and personal responsibilities.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service and drive improvement. Governance arrangements included audits, clinical governance meetings, daily stand-up meetings, walk-rounds, action plans and regional oversight. These systems were used to identify areas requiring improvement and monitor progress against actions. During the assessment, the management team demonstrated a good understanding of the service's strengths and areas requiring further development, including recruitment oversight, hydration monitoring, medicines documentation and environmental improvements. They responded positively to feedback and took action where required, helping to support the ongoing sustainability and development of the service.

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. Staff worked in partnership with people, relatives, healthcare professionals and other organisations to support positive outcomes for people. For example, they worked alongside GPs, advanced nurse practitioners, paramedics, safeguarding teams and other professionals when people required additional support or specialist input.

Staff also maintained links with the local community, including opportunities for people to spend time with visiting school children and take part in activities that reflected their interests and preferences.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to continuous learning and improvement. Incidents, complaints, falls, pressure damage investigations, audits and feedback were reviewed to identify lessons and areas requiring action. The management team were open to suggestions and responded positively when improvements were identified during the assessment. Information from governance processes, people, relatives and staff was used to improve people’s experiences and outcomes.