Linson Court

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed. The provider was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance.

This service scored 62 (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.

The management team and staff demonstrated a commitment to person-centred care and improving outcomes for people. The vision and values of the provider were clearly demonstrated in polices and ways of working and staff felt proud and valued. The motto of the provider was “Where people matter” and polices had recently been revised to ensure they were accessible and aligned with the provider’s values. The provider had recently launched an initiative called, “Our culture, our care” to engage with staff to ensure they were fully involved in embracing a strong culture.

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 had the skills and commitment to support the service. There was a focus on positive outcomes for people and the development and wellbeing of staff and the quality of the service. They were supported by a senior team who had clear roles and were active and visible in the service. People and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager and the support and guidance they provided. Comments included, “The [registered] manager is good. They are brilliant. You can talk to them.”

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

The provider had a whistleblowing policy in place, which included clear guidance to support staff to ‘speak up.’ Posters in staff areas also highlighted processes to follow in the event staff had concerns. This included a Freedom to Speak Up forum and access to a confidential helpline. Staff understood the processes to follow and said they would not hesitate to raise concerns if they had any. Comments included, “Yes I feel 100% able to speak up.”

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 employed a diverse staff team. Human resources policies were in place to ensure staff understood their rights as employees. Staff told us they felt respected and valued and their individual needs were considered.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and improving governance arrangements. We found shortfalls in some areas which had not been identified through the structure in place.

Audits and checks were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Whilst we found most checks were effective, we found shortfalls in relation to staffing which directly impacted on the quality of care and support people received. There was an over reliance on the accuracy of the dependency tool to organise the number and deployment of staff. Records showed there had been concerns raised about staffing numbers and the feedback we received from staff, people and relatives consistently highlighted this. Call bell audits were in place, but they were not robust. The electronic system in the service did not produce data and the sampling that was in place reviewed checks on 4 people. The complaints log also highlighted concerns and there was no evidence the themes and trends about staff responsiveness had been evaluated. The concerns we highlighted in relation to risks associated with maintaining people’s skin integrity had not been identified and addressed by the provider.

The provider had policies in place, which were regularly reviewed.

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 provider collaborated with the local authority who commissioned care and health and social care providers. The registered manager demonstrated they valued and welcomed partnership working. We also saw evidence of other community links, including initiatives to support a local food bank.

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.

There was a culture of learning and improvement across the organisation and a range of initiatives to promote improved outcomes for people. For example, the provider was part of a recognised initiative to promote people choosing decaffeinated coffee. They told us this had led to a decrease in falls across the service, which actively promoted people’s health, wellbeing and safety. Staff in all roles expressed a pride in working for the service. The provider shared lessons and areas for improvement with other services in the group.