Station 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 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.

The provider had identified core values which underpinned the policies they had in place. The vision and values were on display in the home. Most staff felt well supported in their roles and told us they worked as a team to provide effective care. The registered manager had focused on building a culture where staff viewed feedback as an opportunity to learn. The management team used meetings to discuss their expectations about the care provision, helping to develop a shared culture.

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.

The registered manager was experienced, having worked at the service for many years. They were supported by an effective management team. We found them to be open and transparent. They were responsive and acted on any issues highlighted during our assessment.

Not everyone we spoke with told us they knew theregistered manager. However, they undertook daily walk rounds of the home and understood people’s needs well. We saw how people and relatives frequently approached and spent time with the management team during our visit.

Staff told us managers were accessible and supportive. The registered manager demonstrated they were keen to support staff training and progression.

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

The provider had various policies in place including whistleblowing, which staff could access through the provider’s intranet system. The management team discussed these with staff during team meetings. Staff said managers were accessible and they felt able to raise any concerns or issues, which would be listened to and acted upon. A staff member commented, “They (managers) do act on any concerns. They will put things in place.”

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 provider had an equality and diversity policy in place and staff undertook relevant training. The registered manager had arranged some activities with staff to support their understanding of each other’s backgrounds and cultures, to support team building. Staff told us they felt fairly treated within the workplace.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider had governance systems in place with various audits and monitoring procedures. Audits were undertaken to keep oversight of the service. The registered manager undertook a monthly audit, which created an action plan if improvements were required. The provider also ensured a full assurance review was regularly undertaken in line with CQC’s key questions, with a small action plan required following the last review in December 2025.

Whilst in the main these were effective and most issues we found had already be identified by the provider, not all the issues were picked up through this process. We found some issues around records especially related to risk management, the call bell system and required training. The management team acted in relation to these issues during our assessment.

The management team monitored and dealt with any staff performance issues. They were aware of their regulatory responsibilities, and their current inspection rating was on display. They notified CQC of certain incidents as required.

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 management team were keen to work in partnership with other agencies. Station House held “Veteran Friendly” status, which meant it had been assessed and accredited against a framework, to meet certain standards. The aim was to effectively support people and their families who had been part of the Armed Forces.

The registered manager worked in partnership with others such as a local hospice, as part of a dementia project. They offered placements for students from local colleges as part of their work experience for health and social care qualifications.

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.

The provider had an internal quality team who supported the management team to monitor and address any areas for improvement. They shared updates and bulletins about learning from other services when something had gone wrong, they also implemented staff training identified from lessons learnt.

They had introduced the “Seacole Academy” to help support nursing staff to keep up to date with their nursing skills.

The provider proactively used various technologies. They were in the process of rolling out a new care planning system across the service.