Kenrick Centre Also known as Delroy Bonnitto

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 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 68 (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 were confident to identify poor practice and told us concerns would be acted on by management. Relatives told us staff were kind and compassionate. Staff and management fed back passionately about the care being delivered to people and spoke fondly of the people they were supporting. The registered manager responded positively to the feedback we provided and demonstrated a willingness to make the improvements needed.

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 did not always recognise issues prior to our visit and did not act to reduce risk by ensuring all audits were independently verified by managers. We saw staff completed audits, however there were usually no audits completed by managers. We saw evidence of a set of audits which were completed by a unit manager, however these were basic with very little investigation into matters such as care plan quality or environment. The registered manager provided us with an action plan which included how audits were to be conducted in the future. The plan stated that the senior management team would conduct audits and ensure that they analysed any trends to reduce the likelihood of reoccurrence.

Leaders were visible within the service and led by example to their staff team, demonstrating inclusive behaviours. There was a stable management and staff team. The registered manager was committed and understood their legal responsibilities. Where areas of concern were identified by us, managers were open, honest and committed to making the required improvements. Staff knew their roles, responsibilities and how to support each other. They told us they felt supported and valued by the management team. People and their relatives spoke highly of the staff and management team. They told us they knew who the management team were. A person told us, “The staff and managers are really good to me. Even when they can’t do something due to time or weather problems, they will explain why and see if they can plan something else.”

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

Staff were provided with the relevant policies and procedures detailing what was expected of staff working for the service. Staff told us they felt able to raise any issues or concerns, including poor practice. Staff were confident senior staff and managers would listen to them. They understood the whistleblowing policy with staff telling us how they feel empowered to report concerns to the registered manager.

Processes to seek the views of staff were well embedded; this included regular team meetings and individual staff supervisions. Where meetings were held, these were recorded, allowing staff who were unable to attend to review the content.

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.

There were processes for staff recruitment and induction. Staff received training relevant to their roles. Staff felt respected and able to work in an environment that was supportive and free from discrimination. Support and reasonable adjustments were in place for staff when needed.

The registered manager did not always have clear oversight of good governance. They did not always have governance systems that were effective at analysing the service provision and quality.

We found that audits for essential components such as medicines, environment and care plans were not completed by the registered manager or the senior management team. These were completed by senior care workers, which meant that managers did not always have full oversight if any problems arose. An example was a Senior care worker whose role was to provided people’s medication, also completed quality audits on the medicines. This pose a risk of managers not having full oversight and not identifying any risk patterns or areas for improvement.

Care plans were paper files as well as an electronic system. Different aspects of people’s care were on different systems. There was a risk that new or agency staff would find it difficult to understand a person’s needs or risks quickly and accurately., .

When this was discussed with the registered manager, they showed us an action plan of how they will ensure both care plans are carefully amalgamated to provide easy access information to staff and people. We found the action plan to be robust and would enable the management team to address the shortfalls we found.

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.

Partners had positive experiences of working with the provider to collaborate on the delivery of safe, high-quality care to people. We spoke to Social workers, District Nurses and Occupational Therapists who told us that the managers worked with them to have a positive impact upon people’s lives.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The lack of analysing trends by failing to complete robust quality audits mean tthat opportunities could be missed to analyse trends and patterns of concern. However, the registered manager demonstrated they wanted to drive improvements in people’s care and told us they were committed to doing this.

Trend analysis was completed of some data including falls, risk factors, staffing issues, and people’s wellbeing, however this was not consistent.