The Firs 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 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 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.

People lived in a home where the provider had a clear vision and strategy which was shared and understood by all. The vision was based on transparency, inclusion, equity and equality.

The provider aimed to provide high quality care in a homely environment. One person told us, “It’s alright here. I do definitely feel well looked after.” A visitor said, “There have been lots of improvements to the place. Much more homely and no concerns about the level of care."

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.

There was a registered manager in post who was also the operations manager for the provider. Another manager had been employed at the home and was being supported by the current registered manager. They had applied to be registered with the Care Quality Commission.

We heard mixed views about the management at the home. One member of staff said, “There have been lots of improvements.” Another said, “Managers are really dedicated to a good standard of care for everyone.” However, we also heard that some staff and visitors found the manager abrupt and at times rude. We shared this feedback with the manager during the inspection.

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

People and staff felt able to raise concerns. Staff said they would be comfortable to raise any issues with the operations manager or the manager at the home.

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.

People were cared for by a diverse workforce from different cultures and backgrounds. Staff spoken with all felt fairly treated by the provider and their colleagues.

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. Some minor improvements were needed to make sure they acted on findings of audits and checks.

There was a staffing structure at the home which helped to make sure staff had clear roles and responsibilities and people always had access to senior staff.

The provider carried out regular audits and health and safety checks to monitor standards and drive ongoing improvements. Where shortfalls were identified by audits and checks it was not always clear what action had been taken to address these. For example, a kitchen audit identified various issues, and an action plan was attached. Although identified actions had been ticked there was no indication of who had completed the action, when the action was completed or whether further action was needed. Verbal assurances were given by the manager that all areas identified as requiring action had been completed. We also found that some issues identified in health and safety checks had not been acted upon. These were addressed during the inspection.

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 supported students from a local college to gain work experience. We saw feedback from the college thanking the staff for their “Willingness to mentor, guide and invest time in learners.”

We also heard from people about visiting children from a local primary school. This was a musical session which seemed to be enjoyed by all.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation.

The provider and manager were committed to making ongoing improvements to the care and support people received. Learning was shared across the provider organisation. This had included better recording of mental capacity assessments and applications for people to be deprived of their liberty under The Mental Capacity Act 2005.