Brownlands Nursing 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

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.

There was a positive and open culture in the service. People, relatives, and staff felt confident that they would be listened to if they raised any concerns.

Relatives said they were asked for feedback and kept informed. One said, “They ask us for feedback when we are there. I have no concerns, and I would speak to the manager if I did.” Another said, “They contact me straight away if there are any issues.”The open culture meant people and staff felt able to speak up and have a say in the care provided.

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. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff said they felt supported by the managers, who were approachable and easy to talk to. One staff member said, “The manager is very good. She listens if we have anything to say.” Another said, “The manager is very approachable.”

The leadership team had the skills and experience to run the service well. They were open and responded quickly to any issues found during the inspection. They showed a clear commitment to improving the service.The provider, leaders, and staff worked together to make the home feel welcoming and comfortable for people. People and relatives spoke positively about the management team.

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

People, relatives, and staff said they felt comfortable speaking up and raising concerns. They said the manager was approachable and would take action when needed.The provider had up-to-date policies to guide staff on how to raise concerns. Staff said they would report any issues, including concerns about abuse, and understood the process clearly.The registered manager had an open-door approach, and staff said they could speak to them at any time.

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.

There were no concerns about equality, diversity, or inclusion within the staff team. Staff spoke positively about working for the provider and said they were treated fairly.

The provider supported staff wellbeing. Staff had access to support, information, and guidance to help with their physical and emotional health. This included regular wellbeing meetings where they shared advice and resources to support mental health and work–life balance.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. Monitoring processes and procedures covered all aspects of service, risks, performance and delivery of quality care, treatment but were not fully effective. Further scrutiny and accountability were needed to ensure governance oversight was robust.

Systems were in place to check the quality and safety of the service, but they were not always fully effective. The provider had clear governance systems, however some gaps and conflicting information in records, such as fluid charts, bowel charts, care plans, and Mental Capacity Act (MCA) processes, had not been picked up before the inspection.

This showed that stronger checks were needed to make sure risks were identified and dealt with in a timely way. When these issues were raised, the management team responded quickly and reviewed how these areas were being monitored.Business continuity plans were in place to manage emergencies, including fire, flood, infectious outbreaks, and utility failures.

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.

The provider worked closely with the local authority and healthcare professionals. This helped make sure people could access the care and support they needed.

They also had good links with the local community. This gave people more opportunities to take part in activities that matched their interests. One relative said, “They have regular relatives’ meetings, and we are encouraged to talk to them.”The provider shared examples of working in partnership, including with the company that supplies their Electronic Medication Administration Record (eMAR) system, to improve how it works for care homes.People were supported to stay connected with the community. Some went on outings, shopping trips, and visits to see friends and family.

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.

The registered manager said staff were encouraged to share ideas and try new ways to improve person-centred care. Staff confirmed they were regularly asked for feedback on how things could be better. During this inspection, the management team listened and responded well to feedback. The manager said they wanted the service to keep improving and not stand still but continue to move forward.