Kingfield Mews

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 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.The service had a positive culture which was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering. The management team and staff put people's needs and wishes at the heart of everything they did.The management team were passionate about improving people’s quality of life and it was clear staff shared this vision and were proud to work for the service.

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 service had recently experienced a change in leadership. The newly appointed registered manager had demonstrated a clear understanding of the service's strengths and areas for development and was taking steps to further strengthen governance and oversight arrangements.

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

Staff spoke well of the management team saying they felt supported. They also spoke highly of their colleagues. They had staff meetings which were conducted openly and encouraged feedback. Staff told us they felt at ease to speak with the management team and felt listened to. We observed that there was a system in place to support staff to speak up and raise concerns relating to the care of people and the running of the service.

Staff we spoke with told us they were actively involved in developing the service provided at the home. One staff member told us, “We have excellent team working; we love to share ideas and try to improve things.”

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 ensured the policies and procedures supported equality, diversity and human rights. There was a fair employment process in place which did not discriminate against protected characteristics, such as age, gender or disability.

Staff felt respected, supported, and valued. They said the service promoted equality and diversity in daily work and provided opportunities for development and career progression. They could raise any concerns without fear.

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. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

A change in leadership had recently taken place. At the time of the inspection, the new registered manager was establishing and embedding a clinical governance framework to strengthen oversight of quality, safety and performance across the service.

While governance arrangements were developing, they were not yet fully embedded or consistently effective in identifying, monitoring and mitigating risks. However, the registered manager demonstrated a clear understanding of areas requiring improvement and had begun implementing systems and processes to strengthen governance oversight. Internal governance procedures were in place with a range of quality monitoring systems and audits. These had helped identify where actions were required and areas for improvement.

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. Managers worked collaboratively with families and external partners to improve outcomes and maintain transparency.

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.

Managers worked hard to develop a culture which valued reflection, learning and improvement and they were receptive to challenge and welcomed fresh perspectives. The management team were proactive in using information from audits, complaints, incidents and safeguarding alerts to improve the service. The management team worked with staff to understand how things went wrong and involved them in finding solutions. Staff asked people and their relatives for their opinions on the quality of the service through surveys and regular meetings with the managers. This information was then used to improve service delivery. Staff told us the provider encouraged them to be innovative and empowered them to access additional training and professional development.