Greenways 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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection 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.

As a small service, staff had time to get to know people, creating a friendly and welcoming environment. This was valued by people, their relatives, visiting healthcare professionals and the staff team.

Staff demonstrated a commitment to the home, sharing roles and supporting each other to ensure people’s needs were met. For example, a member of domestic staff supported activity provision and senior staff stepped in when there were gaps on the rota for care staff.

Staff told us they were given opportunities to talk about their work during regular supervision meetings with their line manager and their feedback was valued.

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.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and the senior staff in the home. They described the registered manager as being available to provide guidance when they needed it. One staff member told us, “[Registered manager] is lovely, I feel she is very approachable, if I have been worried about anything I feel I can always knock on her door. I don’t ever feel I can't talk to her; she is always on the end of a phone, and we have a Whatsapp group. If I am not sure of anything, I will ping a message across to her and she will always respond." Another staff member commented, “[Registered manager] is lovely as a person, and I think she is doing her job right. She is really friendly with the residents; she is a good manager."

The registered manager had completed further qualifications in management to increase their skill sets and ensure best practice in their oversight of the home.

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

Staff told us the provider, and the registered manager were approachable, and they would be confident to raise concerns with them. Staff felt listened to and that action would be taken in response to their feedback. One staff member told us, “I feel I can go to [registered manager] about anything I am concerned about." Another staff member told us staff meetings were an opportunity to speak up and explained, “It starts off with the manager’s concerns and what they think we could work on a bit more. At the end we are given free speech, and we are allowed to ask any questions. I feel comfortable doing that.”

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 was a small but diverse staff team who were supportive and respectful of each other. Staff told us they felt valued and did not report any concerns about discrimination within the home. The registered manager explained, “We try and work it out so we can all maintain a balanced work and home life and still celebrate our culture and religions."

The provider offered reasonable adjustments for staff with disabilities or caring responsibilities to support an inclusive workforce. One staff member told us the registered manager had taken steps to support their medical condition, encouraging them to take some time out of a shift if they felt it necessary.

The provider did not always have clear systems of accountability or good governance.

Much of the governance in the home was led by the registered manager. On the first day of our inspection the registered manager was on annual leave and senior staff had limited access and information to run the service in their absence. Staff repeatedly told us information such as recommendations from the Speech and Language Therapy team, or pharmaceutical information on how to administer medications covertly, was held by the registered manager and they did not have access to it in their absence. There was also a lack of clarity around the delegation of some tasks, such as submitting notifications to us, which the provider is required to send without delay. The registered manager was available on the second day of our inspection and acknowledged systems needed to be refined so information was readily available to senior staff in their absence.

Checks and audits were used to monitor risks and performance and to understand where improvements were required. However, medication audits and environmental checks needed to be more robust to identify the issues we found. The registered manager started to address these areas during the inspection.

Some checks were focused on monitoring the delivery of care and people’s experiences. For example, observations of staff practice and audits of people’s dining experience, equality and diversity and dignity. This ensured care provision remained centred on people and brought meaningful improvement to their lives.

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.

Staff worked collaboratively with doctors, nurses, therapists and social workers to ensure people received co-ordinated care for the best possible outcomes.

Many people living at Greenways were from the local area and community links were encouraged and respected. Representatives from various community organisations regularly visited the home to spend time with people. This included a representative from the local church, children from local schools and the local guides group.

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.

Staff received ongoing training and were encouraged and supported by the provider to complete further qualifications in health and social care. This benefited people living at Greenways and helped staff develop a career pathway within social care. Some staff had taken on ‘champion’ roles in areas such as dignity, end of life care and continence to share and embed good practice in those areas.

The registered manager was a member of various networking groups that shared best practice and innovations to support the development of the service.

The registered manager welcomed the inspection and demonstrated a commitment to act on our feedback to ensure people consistently received good care.