Thornford Park

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good.

Good: This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Well-led.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Well-led.

We have a shared vision, strategy and culture that is based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding and meeting the needs of people and our communities.

Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they were applied in the work of their team, especially when the service was changing.

The hospital’s senior leadership team had successfully communicated the provider’s vision and values to the frontline staff in this service.

Ward managers could explain how they were working to deliver high quality care within the budgets available.

We have inclusive leaders at all levels who understand the context in which we deliver care, treatment and support and embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. They have the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively and do so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles effectively. The ward managers were both experienced and had expert knowledge about working in PICUs which they shared with their staff teams.

Leaders had a good understanding of the services they managed. They were visible., approachable and could explain clearly how the teams were working to provide high quality care.

Leadership development opportunities were available, including opportunities for staff for career development. Some HCAs had senior HCA roles. For example, there were security, anti-barricade ,and physical healthcare roles for the HCAS.

We create a positive culture where people feel that they can speak up and that their voice will be heard.

Patients and carers had opportunities to give feedback on the service they received in a manner that reflected their individual needs.

Managers and staff had access to the feedback from patients, carers and staff and used it to make improvements.

Patients and carers were involved in decision-making about changes to the service.

Patients and staff could meet with members of the provider’s senior leadership team and governors to give feedback.

We value diversity in our workforce. We work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for patients who work for us.

Staff can apply to work flexibly. For example, agreeing flexible working agreements because of caring responsibilities or health issues. We spoke with staff who had adjusted their working hours due to other commitments.

Managers put reasonable adjustments in place for staff members to help them carry out their role.

The provider undertakes equality monitoring of staff within the service to ensure it is diverse in its make-up and representative of the patient group.

International staff received support from the provider including cultural support and orientation.

We have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. We act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and we share this securely with others when appropriate.

There was a clear governance framework in place that included standing agenda items for, team and directorate level meetings to ensure that essential information was shared across the hospital. Staff knew how to raise concerns and when to escalate them within the organisation.

Staff undertook or participated in local clinical audits. The audits were sufficient to provide assurance and staff acted on the results when needed. For example, 3 patients’ records from each PICU ward were reviewed monthly as part of a care records audit.

Staff had access to the risk register and could escalate concerns when required. Staff concerns matched those on the risk register at ward level. .

The service used systems to collect data from wards and directorates that were not over-burdensome for frontline staff.

Staff had access to the equipment and information technology needed to do their work. The information technology infrastructure, worked well and helped to improve the quality of care.

Information governance systems included confidentiality of patients’ records.

Team managers had access to information to support them with their management role. This included information on the performance of the service, staffing and patient care.

Information was in an accessible format, and was timely, accurate and identified areas for improvement.

We understand our duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so our services work seamlessly for patients. We share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

Directorate leaders engaged with external stakeholders – such as commissioners and Healthwatch. Ward staff had regular contact with commissioners who were responsible for funding patients’ care. Staff were kept updated about changes in the localities from where patients came which may impact upon their discharge plans.

Patients and staff could meet with members of the provider’s senior leadership team and commissioners to give feedback. This included the hospital director who also held regular walk arounds the wards to visit and engage with patients and staff.

We focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across our organisation and the local system. We encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for patients. We actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

Staff were given the time and support to consider opportunities for improvements and innovation and this led to changes.

Staff used quality improvement methods and knew how to apply them. For example, review of amount of time spent in seclusion.

Staff participated in national audits and accreditation schemes relevant to the service and learned from them. For example, Royal College of Psychiatrists accreditation scheme for PICUs.