Oaklands Littlehampton Limited

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 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 was a positive and person-centred culture within the home. Leaders and staff understood the importance of supporting people with dignity and respect and involving them in decisions about their care and daily lives. Staff received regular supervision, meetings and day-to-day support to help maintain standards and encourage reflective practice.

Staff spoke positively about the culture within the service and described leaders as approachable and supportive. One staff member told us, “The management team are approachable and supportive.” Another staff member explained they felt able to raise concerns and would be listened to.

Leaders encouraged feedback from people living at the home and used this to improve the service. For example, following feedback that a display board changed too quickly for people to read, changes were made to improve accessibility.

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 highly visible and accessible within the home and maintained regular contact with people, relatives and staff. The registered manager operated an open-door culture and completed daily walkarounds to maintain oversight of the service and identify any concerns promptly. Staff told us they felt supported by leaders and were able to raise concerns or ask for guidance when needed.

Feedback from professionals was also positive regarding the leadership within the home. One professional told us, “The manager and senior team appear supportive to their team and great with people”. Another professional said, “Management are easy to find and always available.”

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

Staff described an open and supportive culture within the home and told us leaders were approachable and available for guidance and support. The registered manager described a culture where staff were encouraged to raise concerns through supervisions, meetings, handovers and day-to-day discussions. Whistleblowing procedures were in place and staff were aware of how to escalate concerns if required. One staff member said, “I know I can speak to my manager about concerns, but if I needed to I could do this anonymously”.

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 positively about the support and inclusivity within the home. Leaders described promoting an open culture where staff wellbeing, equality, development and individual support needs were discussed through supervisions, meetings and day-to-day conversations. Staff had access to wellbeing support, additional guidance and opportunities for development where required.

Staff consistently described feeling included, valued and supported within their roles. One staff member described how leaders supported them with dyslexia when using electronic systems, telling us, “They always make me feel included, and this is one of the best things about working here”. This reflected leaders understanding of individual staff needs and demonstrated how reasonable adjustments were embedded in practice to support staff wellbeing, inclusion, confidence and development.

Leaders promoted development and progression opportunities within the service. The registered manager described how a member of staff had progressed from night carer to deputy manager role with coaching support and development. This demonstrated leaders’ commitment to supporting staff progression, confidence and long-term development within the service. This contributed to a positive and inclusive culture where staff felt valued, supported to progress and confident raising individual support needs without fear of being treated differently.

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.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service, including audits, governance meetings, incident reviews and oversight of medicines, staffing and care planning. Leaders used information gathered through monitoring systems, feedback and incidents proactively to identify trends, respond quickly to concerns and implement improvements before issues escalated. This supported safer care and reduced the risk of repeated concerns for people living at the home.

Governance systems were used flexibly to respond to people’s individual needs and experiences. For example, following feedback that a display board changed too quickly for people to read, leaders adapted the system to improve accessibility for people within the home. Technology was also used proactively to support oversight of people’s safety and wellbeing, including monitoring falls and supporting timely staff responses when incidents occurred.

Leaders maintained visible oversight within the home and engaged regularly with people, relatives and staff to identify opportunities for improvement and drive continuous learning. Feedback from professionals regarding governance and leadership was consistently positive. One professional told us, “Any information we request is completed and provided in a timely manner.” Another professional said, “Staff are highly engaged with the medication review process and clearly understand its importance.”

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.

The service worked with healthcare professionals, relatives and visiting service providers to support people’s care, wellbeing and daily experiences. Records showed staff contacted relevant professionals when people’s needs changed and shared information to support continuity of care.

Feedback showed staff worked collaboratively with others involved in the service. Leaders also engaged with wider community and sector partners to support community links, shared learning and improvement. One healthcare professional told us, “They routinely contact me in advance to arrange visits and are keen for the reviews to take place each year.” This supported planned partnership working and helped ensure people received appropriate reviews.

A visiting service provider described how staff supported people to attend appointments in the home. They told us, “They often pop in to check on the appointment book, helping people in, prompting and reminding anyone who might forget their appointment.” This showed staff worked with others to support people to access services and maintain routines important to them.

The provider had a strong focus on continuous learning, improvement and innovation across the service. Leaders promoted reflective practice, encouraged feedback and used creative approaches to improve people’s experiences, safety and quality of life.

Leaders demonstrated a proactive approach to improving people’s experiences, safety and wellbeing. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was used to make meaningful changes within the home. For example, feedback from a person receiving care resulted in environmental adjustments to improve accessibility and support independence following a hip replacement. This demonstrated how leaders responded flexibly to people’s changing needs to improve outcomes and maintain independence.

Staff described an open and reflective culture where concerns, ideas and feedback were encouraged and acted upon to improve practice. One staff member told us, “Any concerns we have are raised and acted on.” Leaders encouraged reflective discussions with staff regarding safeguarding, wellbeing and care practices during daily meetings and handovers to support shared learning and continuous improvement within the service. Leaders also engaged with wider sector initiatives and shared learning with others to support improvement and innovation beyond the home.

Technology was also used proactively to support people’s safety and wellbeing. One relative told us, “[Person] has one of those lights and they sense if [Person] has had a fall which alerts staff straight away.” The relative also told us staff responded quickly and kept them informed following incidents or changes in wellbeing. Leaders explained information gathered through the technology was also reviewed alongside care records to help identify patterns, review risks and inform changes to people’s care and support. This helped reduce delays in support, improve oversight of people at risk of falls and provided reassurance to people and relatives.

The culture within the home promoted continuous reflection and improvement, with leaders and staff working proactively to identify opportunities to enhance people’s experiences, safety and independence.