Truscott Manor Care 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.

This is the providers first assessment since it re-registered. This key question has been rated 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 service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. Leaders showed a focused approach in ensuring people receive good quality care.

Staff and leaders demonstrated a positive, compassionate, listening culture, by collaborating with people, their families, carers and professionals. One professional said, “The home emits a warm, compassionate and knowledgeable approach.”

Ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation were captured within people's care plans. This meant that residents receive person-centred care that respects their unique identity and legal rights. Records showed that consistent and regular staff supervisions were undertaken, while staff meetings were held so staff could provide feedback and contribute. Managers and staff understood the diverse needs of the people they supported.

Leaders have the experience, capacity, capability to run the home effectively and safely. The registered manager and provider had worked at the home for a number of years and understood what was required to provide good care to the people living at Truscott Manor.

Leaders were knowledgeable about the issues and priorities of the service. For example, the registered manager said the provider was positive and open about making changes to the decoration of the home, and upgrades had already been completed in some areas.

People, their relatives and professionals spoke warmly about the approach of the leadership of the home. One person said, “It’s really good here, everyone very pleasant (name) is a very good manager.” One staff member said, “The manager does her job well. It’s like a family here.” One professional said, “The proprietor and nominated individual is very experienced and hands-on.” The nominated individual is the person responsible for the service on behalf of the provider.

Leaders encouraged an open service and office where staff could raise any issues about care and their roles.

Staff spoke positively about the openness of the leaders at the home, but there were systems and processes were in place to enable staff to raise concerns anonymously if they wished. The provider had a detailed and thorough policy guiding staff on raising concerns, detailing pathways to speak up freely and for whistleblowing.

We observed staff communicating consistently and effectively throughout the inspection. Staff confirmed that leaders were approachable and receptive to concerns and ideas about people’s support. They felt comfortable doing this. One staff member said, “I would talk to (manager) or the nurses, any one of them, they always listen.”

The leadership team were clear and proactive on the approach to staff inclusion and equality, acknowledging with a workforce of staff who came from diverse backgrounds. Staff had received Equality and Diversity Training as part of their training within the service.

The provider ensured that protected characteristics of staff were considered as part of this approach. Staff were afforded flexible working arrangements to accommodate religious festivals and practices. One staff member said, “We have multicultural staff here, black, Indian, Filipino. Sometimes staff might want Sunday off, so they might work half a day or have every other Sunday off; they accommodate that.”

There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements. Staff understood their role and responsibilities.

The provider had effective systems in place to manage the current and future performance. Quality assurance checks and audits were conducted to assess the quality of support being provided. The registered manager acknowledged that some planned quality checks had not been completed as planned in recent months, but assurances were given that governance arrangements had been changed so that they could now focus on their completion. We saw no impact on the quality of support during this period.

Regulatory responsibilities were understood by leaders and there were robust arrangements for the availability, integrity and confidentiality of data, records and data management systems. The registered manager stated that they received consistent and positive support from the provider.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership. Staff and leaders collaborated with partners and professionals in care, and shared information to ensure effective joined up working.

Appropriate referrals for specialist and health support were made for people, where relevant and needed. One professional said, “In my view, Truscott is always super responsive to requests.” Another professional said, “They are really good at letting us know. Staff are very knowledgeable and professional. Management - they are always very welcoming and polite.”

Feedback from professionals was, without exception, positive about staff approach and the good experiences and outcomes people received. One partner said, “Our relationship with Truscott is very good as they always seem to be proactive and knowledgeable about their resident's care. We have a high level of trust between the two services and a strong working relationship.”

Staff and leaders had a good understanding of how to make improvements happen. The approach was consistent and included measuring outcomes and impact.

Processes were in place to learn and review when things went wrong. Staff and leaders discussed incidents together. Staff discussed a proactive relationship between care and nursing staff where support and communication were consistent. One staff member said, “Nurses assist the GPs or visiting healthcare professionals. They then share any information at handover meetings. I would let the nurses know if there were any changes in a person’s condition.”

The provider and registered manager encouraged reflection and were open to learning. One professional said, “Truscott Manor showed willingness to identify and receive further support from the local authority within areas where this was deemed useful.”