Ashdowne Care Centre

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 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.

Our conversations with staff showed they worked well as a team. For example, they said, “It is a good environment… and the staff get on well together.” They had a clear understanding of the ethos of the service to provide good quality care to everyone living at the home. Despite there not being a registered manager in post, they felt the unit leads and the operations manager were accessible and approachable.

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 unit leads had stepped up to cover the vacant manager’s post and worked closely with the operations manager who was based at the home. Staff talked about the leadership team being good role models who shared their knowledge to advance the practice of staff and modelled current best practice. The unit leads also addressed competency issues within the staff group, for example completion of night care records, to promote better practice. In these instances, they met with staff and reviewed their work to monitor their performance.

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 told us they could share their views and felt able to go to the leadership team if they had concerns. The provider had processes to support staff to speak up. This included supervision, handovers, staff meetings and a whistleblowing policy. Staff were clear on their responsibility to speak up and were confident they could do this to benefit staff and people living at the home. Relatives felt involved in their family member’s care. For example, they said, “They do talk to me and keep me updated. They are very good with the communication.”

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 policies to promote equality, diversity and inclusion and to protect staff from discrimination and harassment. The staff group worked well together to the benefit of people living at the home.

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. However, there was no registered manager in post.

The service was without a registered manager or manager in post. However, recruitment was actively taking place with the post being offered to a candidate who later withdrew their application. The operations manager had based themselves at the service to oversee the running of the home.

The provider had systems to monitor the standard of care provided at the service. The operations manager completed regular monitoring audits. This included reviewing outcomes of the audits, speaking with people and staff and touring the building to check on the daily experiences of people living and working at the home. This gave the provider a good oversight of the service. There was a clear staffing and management structure, and staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Statutory notifications were submitted 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 staff group provided us with examples of how they worked with health care professionals for the benefit of people living at the home. People’s care records showed this good practice, which was confirmed by people and their relatives.

The provider focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local system.

Staff were positive about the level of training including the standard of induction, the range of training and continual staff support in place. A staff member said, “I had a proper little induction booklet … I’ve never had that before anywhere … The induction has been good, and I have done all the online training which is about 25 courses and that covers all the mandatory training.”