Pine View 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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.

This service scored 50 (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 and culture, but improvement was required to ensure it was embedded throughout the service and understood by staff. The provider was passionate about ensuring that people received support based on equality and human rights, and diversity and inclusion. However, staff needed support in understanding some peoples’ behaviours in order to have a better understanding of their role in promoting person centred care. When asked about how staff treated them, a person told us, “They [carers] are very caring.”

Whilst we saw the leadership team were very supportive to people who used the service and staff, improvements were required to ensure all aspects of the service were being effectively monitored and robust systems and processes embedded into the service.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. One staff member told us, “[Manager] makes me feel so relaxed in myself, I feel like I could tell [them] anything.”

The provider told us they valued diversity in their workforce. They told us they worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them and adjustments made where possible to support staff with their personal circumstances. Staff told us they felt supported and valued by the provider. One staff member told us, “[Management] are very supportive, never once have they not answered the phone when needed.”

The provider did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. The provider did not have effective environmental or Infection Prevention and Control checks in place to identify and drive improvements. For example, regular audits had not identified the concerns we found with the safety of the building and the cleanliness of the home. Accurate, complete and contemporaneous records were not reliably maintained. For example, care plans did not consistently contain enough detail and MCA records did not adhere to the associated legislation. The registered manager acknowledged our findings and started to take action following the assessment to mitigate some of the risks.

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. However, the service had little engagement with the local community to identify new and innovative ideas that could lead to better outcomes for people who used the service, for example participation in local events and leisure clubs.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. Improvement is needed to ensure the provider has an embedded robust governance system which identifies shortfalls of safe care delivery and treatment.