Archived: Gardens Neurological 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 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 had been a number of changes at the service, including the closure of the first floor in the weeks preceding this assessment. On the day of our visit to the service, a consultation process began with staff to discuss potential changes to staffing structure in the future.

All staff we spoke with confirmed that recent changes to management, processes and oversight had been challenging at times and the consultation was unsettling for them. However, all remained committed to delivering a good service to people.

The provider confirmed they made robust arrangement to support staff through the changes being made and were committed to ensuring staff wellbeing remained a priority, alongside consistent care to the people living at the service.

Partners and visiting professionals gave positive feedback.

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 feedback regarding overall leadership was positive. All staff shared that senior staff were approachable and they felt supported. One member of staff told us, “The managers have an open-door policy. I do feel I can talk to managers.”

The service did not have a registered manager in post at the time of the assessment, however one had been appointed, and they were due to commence their role shortly. Throughout the recruitment process, the service had benefitted from having a consistent manager from the provider organisation.

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

Staff, partners and visiting professionals confirmed there was an open culture at the service and felt they would be listened to if they spoke up. One member of staff told us, “They (management) do welcome us speaking up, they encourage us.”

The provider had a whistleblower policy in place, with processes in place to support staff in speaking up.

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 service had a diverse workforce.

The provider had a suite of policies in place to support equality, diversity and inclusion.

All staff were invited to participate in meetings and surveys which included opportunities for them to provide feedback on their experiences.

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.

Staff told us they knew their roles and responsibilities.

The provider had a system of audits and checks in place which had recently been reviewed and adapted. These checks were embedding into everyday practice. There was a clear schedule for those required to be completed weekly, monthly, quarterly and annually.

Actions from these were included in improvement plans and shared with relevant staff, partners and stakeholders.

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.

People told us they were supported to access other professionals, where needed, in relation to their health, safety and wellbeing.

Staff told us they were provided with information and outcomes following assessments, reviews and visits from partner agencies. This supported them to work in accordance with up-to-date information.

There was a clear system in place to ensure partnership working with health social care professionals, and local partners.

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.

All processes in place were used to effectively identify where learning and improvement was needed. Actions were recorded, planned for and completed.

The providers quality assurance system covered all aspects of the service and included people’s experience and feedback received. Where errors were found or learning identified, this was approached positively.