Little Manor Care Centre

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 82 (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 very clear shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and an exceptional understanding of the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider aims, goals and values for the service were shared with staff at interview stage. Staff knew and understood what the service was for and what support people needed.

Without exception staff spoke positively about their work at the service, recognising the value of helping people to achieve their goals.

The service was jointly funded by local authority and health, so collaboration and partnership working was key to success. Staff understood this and worked alongside other professionals to enable people to complete their therapy and move back to their homes.

There was an open and transparent culture. Leaders made sure staff understood when things went wrong there was no blame. Identifying better ways of working was the focus for reflection and learning events. The registered manager said they told staff it was important for them to report mistakes or concerns. They recognised that things could go wrong and wanted staff to feel comfortable and able to report any concerns. That openness and transparency would enable them to work towards preventing recurrence and improving the service.

Staff were encouraged to develop their skills and knowledge and supported to do work-based qualifications. Clinical staff had been provided with additional training on areas such as tissue viability which helped improve clinical judgements. This also enabled them to provide tissue viability nurses with accurate and clear assessments of people’s skin integrity which made sure people had timely care. Staff were encouraged to work towards promotions and had opportunities to progress their careers within the organisation.

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.

Leaders were passionate about the aims of the service and the ethos of enabling people to move back to their homes as soon as they were able. There was a management team at the service who were experienced and had good knowledge of local services.

Staff told us they were well supported by management and able to approach them whenever they needed to. Comments from staff about the management included, “The registered manager is approachable, we can say anything to them” and “Management are approachable. Any issues or problems they will give good guidance on what to do.”

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

Information and guidance on speaking up was provided to staff during their induction and was available at the service. Leaders encouraged staff to speak to them about any concern, and all staff had telephone numbers for senior leadership and directors of the organisation. Staff told us they felt able to speak up and share their concerns on any topic. One member of staff said, “I feel able to speak up and I feel listened to.”

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 told us they were committed to creating a workplace where everyone felt safe, valued and supported. The provider told us they had a diverse workforce, and all staff were expected to treat everyone with dignity and respect.

Staff were provided with training on equality, diversity and inclusion and had information on this topic on notice boards and policies and procedures. Staff told us they had not seen or heard about any discrimination at the service and felt valued. Comments from staff included, “There are equal opportunities for everyone, my experience has always been good”, “It is a very supportive organisation. There are lots of staff from many cultures, they support us all well” and “There is no discrimination, we are very diverse. I feel valued and respected and we respect and value people’s choices.”

At our last inspection governance systems were not effective in identifying shortfalls in order for improvement to be carried out. At this inspection, improvement had been made to governance systems and the provider was effectively carrying out various audits and quality checks. The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Regular audits were being completed which enabled the provider to have oversight of the service. Checks were made by various different staff and any actions identified were monitored until completed.

Governance systems were effective in identifying areas to improve and develop. There was a service development plan which outlined aims for the development of the service and any larger scale improvement work.

Checks were also completed by various external stakeholders. For example, the local authority visited to complete their own quality assurance checks. Following the last check completed by the local authority in January 2026, there were no actions for improvement identified.

The provider clearly understood and carried out their duty to collaborate and worked in partnership, and services worked seamlessly for people. They always shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The provider was instrumental in setting up a local partnership for providers of adult social care. The registered manager was on the board for this organisation which aimed to support other providers to develop, communicate and have a say in care delivery. The provider was a family run organisation with strong links in their local community. The registered manager had exceptional knowledge about local services, stakeholders and potential challenges people might face.

There was exceptionally good partnership working with various health and social care professionals. The provider was included in daily meetings with acute hospitals to identify how they could contribute to increased discharges from hospitals. The provider shared an example of how they helped to identify additional placements that could be used to free up beds at the service. This enabled more people to be discharged from acute hospitals which was of benefit to the wider society.

There were electronic records as well as wipe boards in people’s bedrooms which meant all staff could easily see the most up to date guidance on how to support people. One health professional said, “If we have a unique patient [and need specialist equipment], we liaise with [provider] to get the additional equipment and can usually get it the same day.” One staff member said, “We have patients come in and go out of here: it's a proper rehab centre. We can watch the patients progress and improve.”

People were very positive about their rehabilitation planning and care and support provided by staff. People shared they could see themselves improving and looked forward to being able to move back to their homes. One person said, “I am always kept up to date with how I am progressing and the next plan of action by care staff and physiotherapists.”

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.

Leaders were keen to be involved in any relevant research and development and had completed some pilot programmes. For example, staff had been involved in trialling technology to monitor people’s wounds and pain. The provider was reviewing use of artificial intelligence and other technologies to improve outcomes for people.