Stoneyford Care Home

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 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. We saw evidence of the manager discussing and updating people, relatives and staff about recruitment challenges and the timeframe for improvements. This was done in resident and relative meetings and people were able to give feedback about the management teams’ plans. This ensured the provider maintained the culture of transparency and sought opportunities for engagement with all stakeholders.

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 provider supported senior managers to undertake recognised qualifications to ensure they had the skills and knowledge needed to lead effectively at Stoneyford Care Home. For example, the manager had undertaken a level 5 diploma in Health and Social Care Management, which isa qualification designed to equip managers with the leadership and management skills needed to run health and social care organisation.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up, and their voice would be heard. There was a complaint policy in place. People and staff told us they knew how to raise a complaint. People we spoke with told us they had not needed to raise a concern or a complaint since our last assessment, but everyone said they were confident the registered manager would respond if they did.

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 felt listened to and valued by the new manager. One staff member said, “I was nervous when I found out we were getting a new manager, but it has been really positive. They are very supportive and will help in any area of the home whenever I ask for support.” Staff received regular supervision and competency checks which promoted learning and development and ensured all staff received the same opportunities to develop and progress.

While the provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance, they did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate. As described under safe, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) assessments were not always detailed and person centred. Audits had identified the issues with staffing and the impact this had had on the frequency of deep cleaning throughout the home. However, audits failed to identify methods or timeframes to mitigate these risks. This was discussed with the management team who took immediate steps to ensure these risks were mitigated.

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. We spoke with a professional visiting on the day who said, “Staff work well with us and follow our recommendation. They raise concerns appropriately.” Care plans we reviewed documented external professionals’ advice and guidance, so all staff had a clear understanding of people’s care needs.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The provider and management team missed opportunities to identify concerns in MCA assessments during care plan reviews. Where required improvements were identified, action plans were not always put into place consistently to ensure improvements were being made. This meant the management team did not always have oversight of the progress or deterioration of known risk and could not ensure safe standards were always embedded quickly.

The provider arranged refresher and upskilling training for staff following our feedback. This demonstrated their commitment to improve learning and innovation in the home going forward.