Affinity Trust Specialist Division South

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 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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. Staff told us they enjoyed working for the service. Staff comments included, “This is my first support work job but it's good, I feel I'm supported with whatever I need, if I need information, I get support and advice” and “I feel you must have an aptitude for this particular type of work. We are much better now at being more consistent and listening to what people are trying to tell us.” “Staff received information on the requirements of their role and the systems in place to meet people’s needs in the employee handbook, training, policies and procedures, spot checks and supervision. Systems were in place to share learning and good practice across the provider’s locations, including lessons learned.

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 managers of the service worked well together and combined their knowledge, and experience to effectively manage the service. They had effectively reviewed and improved the systems to ensure people were provided with good quality care. People and their relatives felt the service was managed well. Comments included, “It is well manged, [Name] knows who the boss is and the staff team seems okay not stretched” and “Its good, staff watch [Name] doesn’t harm themselves. They know [Name] and what the risks are. I wouldn’t change anything.” Staff were positive about their supervising managers and the leadership of the service. Staff told us, “The leadership has really improved since the last CQC inspection. Before the leadership was inconsistent and management were creating triggers for people’s distress because of their decision making. Now we are being encouraged to listen and identify cues and learn together. Managers are more approachable and supportive. The service is in a much better place than before" and "We have good support from managers. During team meetings and 1-1s they will ask staff for feedback and see if there is anything we can improve on. Also, they come round every couple of days to make sure we are all okay and things are running smoothly."

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider had forums and processes where staff could raise concerns or make suggestions. We saw that management actively promoted staff to speak up to drive improvement. They encouraged staff to raise concerns, share ideas and learning and promoted the value of doing so. Staff were confident that their voices were heard. There was evidence to show managers investigated any concerns or issues sensitively and confidentially; lessons were shared and acted on. There was a whistleblowing policy in place and senior managers visited people and staff in services to have a visible presence and direct line of communication. People were supported to understand their tenancies and staff advocated for people to ensure they had the right care and environment to meet their needs and wishes.

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. Service managers encouraged teams to understand every team member’s diversity to promote tolerance and acceptance. Staff described how they were supported to attain higher levels of qualifications and were afforded equal opportunity in applying for promotion or different roles within the organisation.

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 information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Legal and regulatory requirements at the service were met and the registered managers undertook a range of audits, checks and analysis which enabled them to have good oversight of the service. For example, the registered manager was aware staff approaches needed to develop in some services and had introduced approaches such as group discussions of people’s care plans and shared learning after incidents to develop staff understanding and awareness. The provider had introduced new data led systems and processes which facilitated improved oversight at provider level. For instance, a significant incident pathway supported monitoring and analysis at provider level to help ensure people were receiving safe care and risks were mitigated. Service managers played an important role in identifying improvements and ensuring these were embedded into staff working practices. There were robust systems in place to ensure regular reviews of people’s care plans and needs and to provide assurance people were being supported in the least restrictive way.

The provider understood and carried out 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 leadership team had established good partnership working with various organisations and external stakeholders to provide positive outcomes for people. They knew who to contact if people required additional support from other healthcare professionals such as GPs, district nurses. They had established positive relationships with landlords which helped people to maintain their tenancies and worked with commissioners of supported living to advocate for people in ensuring they had sufficient support to meet their needs.

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 evidence at this assessment of a commitment to continuously improve and to further develop to sustain the improvements that had been made. There were a range of monitoring and audit tools to assess and monitor the delivery of care and support to people. The service had systems in place for learning and improvements with feedback being sought from, people, relatives and staff to ensure there was a culture of continuous improvement and to support the registered managers on enhancing overall service quality. The registered manager was committed to personal and professional development to achieve the best possible outcomes for people with staff.