Blossomfield Rose 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the service’s values and vision and consistently applied these in their day-to-day practice. They were committed to supporting people to achieve their goals, maximise their independence and lead fulfilling lives. This was reflected in the person-centred support provided, which promoted choice, inclusion and positive outcomes for people using the service.

Staff told us they understood and shared the manager’s vision for the service and felt involved in decision-making processes. Equality, diversity and inclusion were actively promoted, and people’s individual preferences, wishes and choices were respected and incorporated into the support they received.

Regular staff meetings were held to share information, discuss developments within the service and promote learning and continuous improvement.

Managers were accessible and actively engaged in the daily operation of the service. Staff reported feeling well supported and confident in approaching managers to raise concerns or seek advice when needed. Managers showed a strong commitment to their own professional development, keeping their knowledge aligned with current best practice and sector standards.

They demonstrated a clear understanding of CQC requirements and expectations, which was evident in the effective management and ongoing monitoring of the service.

We saw evidence that the management team knew the staff, people and their families well.

The registered manager was well supported by the nominated individual who regularly visited the service. This enabled them to maintain oversight of any issues, become familiar with the people who lived there and provide guidance when needed.

One relative told us, “Yes, I’m happy. Overall it’s a very good service. It would possibly be good for the manager to be there on some weekend occasions to meet and greet. I would recommend them and score them 8-9/10”.

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

A whistleblowing policy was in place and readily accessible to staff, who demonstrated a clear understanding of how to raise concerns in accordance with established procedures. Staff reported feeling confident that any concerns raised would be taken seriously and acted upon appropriately. They described a positive, open, and supportive culture where they felt safe to speak up. One staff member commented, “I feel comfortable raising concerns. We work as a team, and there is a whistleblowing process in place which ensures confidentiality.”

Staff were aware of the whistleblowing policy and expressed confidence in using it if required. Although staff surveys were planned, they had not yet been implemented. Staff also stated that the manager maintained an open-door policy and was approachable, allowing them to discuss concerns confidentially whenever necessary.

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.

Staff reported that they were treated fairly, respectfully, and consistently across the service. They described the workplace as inclusive and supportive, where diversity was recognised, valued, and promoted. Where required, reasonable adjustments had been made to enable staff to carry out their roles effectively. Managers had implemented policies and procedures to support a range of staff needs and ensured that information regarding local support services was available and accessible when needed.

Staff expressed no concerns regarding their own treatment or that of their colleagues and felt that equality and fairness were embedded within the culture of the service. A diverse workforce was evident, and additional measures had been taken to enhance cultural awareness and support staff recruited from overseas.

The service had also established additional support arrangements for agency staff, including a condensed induction programme and a buddy system to help them familiarise themselves with the service and its routines. Evidence showed that agency staff, including those returning to the service, continued to receive support from a permanent member of staff throughout their shifts to ensure consistency, safety, and effective integration into the team.

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 did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes.

The service had governance arrangements in place to support the effective oversight of quality and safety, with a programme of regular audits used to monitor performance and identify areas for improvement. However, the systems and processes in place had not identified all of the issues found during the inspection. Further improvements were required to strengthen oversight of medicines management and Mental Capacity Act (MCA) compliance. The Registered Manager was responsive to feedback provided during the inspection and had already taken steps to enhance auditing processes and improve staff knowledge and understanding of mental capacity requirements.

Information was managed securely and in accordance with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requirements, ensuring that confidential and sensitive information was stored, accessed, and shared appropriately.

The service also had effective business continuity arrangements in place, with plans detailing the actions to be taken in the event of emergencies or unexpected incidents. These provided clear guidance to support service continuity and minimise disruption to people receiving care.

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.

During our inspection, we observed a wide range of activities taking place within the home, creating a welcoming and inclusive atmosphere.

People, relatives, and staff consistently described a strong sense of community within the service. Relatives spoke positively about the relationships that had been developed and, when discussing staff who knew their loved ones well, referred to the whole staff team rather than care staff alone. This reflected a collective approach to providing person-centred care and support.

External healthcare professionals also spoke positively about the service, describing effective communication and collaborative working practices. They told us that staff were proactive in raising concerns and worked constructively with them to meet people's needs. Appropriate systems were in place to ensure information was shared securely and in line with data protection requirements.

Managers and staff demonstrated effective partnership working with a range of health and social care professionals and agencies. They worked closely with GPs, social workers, community healthcare teams, and specialist services to ensure people received coordinated, responsive, and high-quality care. The service had also established strong links with local community organisations, enabling people to access a variety of activities, resources, and opportunities that promoted independence, social inclusion, and overall wellbeing.

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.

A strong culture of continuous improvement was evident throughout the service, with managers and staff actively seeking opportunities to enhance the quality of care and support provided. Incidents, audit findings, and performance information were regularly reviewed, and action plans were developed and implemented to drive service improvements and achieve positive outcomes for people.

There were well-established mechanisms in place for people using the service and their relatives to share their views and experiences, including through meetings, surveys, and informal discussions. Feedback was valued and used to inform decision-making and service development. For example, people had expressed a wish for greater opportunities to access community activities and outings as a group. In response to this feedback, the provider recently purchased a minibus, enabling people to participate more easily in social and community-based activities.

The provider had also responded positively to feedback about making the environment more dementia friendly. To support this, they had commissioned specialist input to improve the home's signage and wayfinding systems. These enhancements were designed to better support people living with cognitive impairment, promoting independence, orientation, and overall wellbeing within the service.