Bradbury House

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 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.

The management team had the appropriate skills and experience to lead effectively, understood the risks and priorities for the service and acted with openness and honesty during this inspection.

The provider had inclusive leaders who had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

There had been a lack of consistency of management in the home and there was no registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. The provider had ensured suitable management cover as an interim measure whilst recruitment for a suitable manager is in progress.

The provider’s level of oversight had not always been effective in identifying some shortfalls we found during the assessment. The need for more consistency in the home had been recognised by the provider and an experienced interim management team and was already in place.

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

Regular meetings between the interim manager and staff had recently been reestablished. Staff were given opportunities to discuss performance via a supervision and appraisal process. However, the frequency of staff supervisions had not always been completed in line with the provider’s policies. Staff told us they could speak up about anything at any time with the interim manager and felt they were listened to and where possible things were acted on.

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 spoke very positively about their experiences of working at the home. Staff told us they felt supported, more supported now by the interim manager and felt positive about their workplace.

The provider did not always have clear systems of good governance. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

There were a range of quality monitoring and auditing processes in place. However, some processes were not always effective in identifying some concerns we found. Recruitment checks of suitability had not all been consistently completed and the safe temperature storage of topical medicines needed action. The home’s oversight and monitoring systems were now being consistently applied by the interim manager and this provided us with reassurances.

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.

Relationships with the local GP and practice members were seen to be working well together and we received positive feedback from visiting health professionals to the home. People were supported to access social activities and be part of the local community and have good outcomes.

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.

There was a strive for improvement, consistency and development evident by the new interim management team. The service actively involved staff, people and their relatives in developing the service and evaluating it.