Chocolate Works Care Village

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 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.

Over the last 18 months, the registered manager has worked hard to embed a shared culture where all staff have a clear understanding of the support they need to provide. Staff understood their role within the service and what was expected of them.

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 was open, transparent and a skilled leader who drove continued improvement and embedded best practice. The registered manager had clear support from the provider who routinely visited and did quality checks. Staff respected the registered manager and deputy manager who were present in the service. One visiting profession told us, “I have a good working relationship with managers. They are responsive.”

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

There was a culture of openness where staff, people and relatives felt able to speak up. Opportunities were given to all people to share views openly across the service. Staff attended regular meetings to discuss the care, share best practice and give their opinions on how they could improve. One staff member told us, “I feel able to speak up but nothing seems to ever change with staffing levels.”

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.

Staff felt there was a diverse and inclusive workforce where there were no forms of discrimination. Staff worked as a single team to strive to provide people with high quality care.

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 wide range of audits were completed, including care plan, medication, IPC and environmental checks, which were used to identify areas for improvement and implement action plans.

Governance systems supported clear oversight of risk. Accidents and incidents were reviewed through regular clinical meetings and quality reports, where trends and patterns were analysed, and learning was shared with the staff team to reduce recurrence. Monthly quality assurance processes further demonstrated monitoring and review of performance, with evidence of actions taken following findings.

Leaders promoted a culture of continuous improvement and accountability. While governance processes were largely effective, some inconsistencies were identified in practice, such as medication management and aspects of safety compliance, demonstrating that further embedding of systems was required.

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.

There were established systems to engage with people and those important to them. The service had good local connections with community groups and organisations to be part of the community.

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.

Leaders encouraged a culture of improvement and reflection. There was a shared vision of ongoing development within the service, driven by the registered manager, with staff speaking positively about changes and improvements that had been introduced. The provider demonstrated responsiveness to feedback and emerging risks, taking action to address issues such as call bell response times and care planning gaps. However, while learning systems were effective, there remained some inconsistencies in embedding improvements into day-to-day practice, indicating further work was needed to fully sustain change.