New Bradley Hall

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, relatives and visitors were complimentary about the care provided by the staff and the way the home was managed. A person told, “It’s my home now and I love it here. “A relative said, “I chose this home due to the high standards of care provided by the staff. The home feels nice and has a family atmosphere.”

The provider displayed their values within the home for all to see and refer to. The provider’s vision and ethos were shared with new staff as part of their induction, and the registered manager told us this is regularly discussed during team meetings. The registered manager told us, “Everyone deserves the best care.”

Feedback we received from staff and the management team indicated there was a strong culture of team working and providing person-centred care and support. Staff commented positively about their employment at the service and said there was an excellent team approach. Several staff described the home as having a culture ‘like working with a family’. Observations showed staff spent time with people and knew people as individuals. We saw staff effectively communicating with each other.

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 home was led by a team of highly capable, compassionate, and inclusive leaders who set a clear and positive direction for the home.

It was clear the registered manager and deputy manager were knowledgeable about the people living at the home and their individual needs. This was supported by the regular weekly meetings held where key information was shared to ensure everyone in all roles were kept up to date and received essential information. The registered manager and deputy manager were described as approachable, and supportive.

The management team and provider representatives worked closely and effectively together. Discussions with the provider representatives, registered manager and deputy manager all demonstrated a clear understanding of their roles, and a desire to provide high quality care and achieve good outcomes for people. All were receptive to the feedback provided and keen to make any required improvements.

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

The provider and management team promoted a culture where staff, relatives, and people felt able to speak up about any concerns or suggestions. A person said, “I don’t see any of the big management but the lady in charge on this floor is excellent so if I needed to have a moan, I’d speak to her but haven’t so far.”

Feedback was sought from people, relatives and professionals through annual surveys. Where recommendations were made, action was taken to address these. For example, for more music to be played on the unit, and changes to the food, and activities.

Staff told us they felt able to ‘speak up’ and share any ideas or concerns they had either through surveys, meetings, handovers or in their supervision sessions. A staff member said, “I am confident to speak up to share ideas or if I had concerns about something. I know I will be listened to.”

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 told us they felt valued and were able to be themselves at work. A staff member told us, “Everyone is accepted and valued here, we are all treated equally.”

The provider promoted inclusion and celebrated diversity. Information was displayed from LGBTQ+ community to promote an inclusive environment. The provider had policies and procedures in place that upheld the principles of equality and diversity. The provider was aware of their duty as an employer, to understand and respect people’s and staff’s protected characteristics to prevent discrimination.

Staff told us how the management team were flexible and understanding of their individual needs in relation to their personal circumstances. A staff member told us, “This the best placed I have worked in respect of feeling valued by the management and provider, I have never received financial gifts or well- done messages before so they are good to work for.” The provider made appropriate workplace adjustments where needed.

The registered manager told us they had an open-door policy and ensured all staff regardless of role, background, or personal circumstances felt heard and supported. This inclusive leadership style helped build trust and equity within the workforce.

Although the provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability some improvements were required with the governance systems. This was to ensure these could be used to manage and deliver good quality care, and support.

The management team and provider were committed to ensuring people received a high level of care.There were systems in place to identify and manage current and future risks. Audits were carried out and any findings acted upon.However, audits had not always identified additional areas for improvement that we found including inconsistencies in the completion of care monitoring records and absence of sufficiently detailed guidance within PRN protocols and information around people’s specific health conditions. Medication audits did not include looking at the frequency PRN medications were administered to ensure these were escalated where appropriate. The management team and provider were receptive to the feedback we shared, and immediate action were taken to address the gaps we had identified. This included completing audits, updating records, liaising with health professionals, and an action has been developed with timescales to improve the records and strengthen the systems in place.

The management team completed daily walk around to all the units to ensure people were supported appropriately, staff were carrying out their roles as expected, and the building was safe and maintained. Any issues were addressed immediately. Regular ‘buzz’ meetings also enabled staff from all areas of the home to share and receive key information and for the management team to maintain daily oversight. Information from these meetings was recorded and escalated to the provider. Meetings were held at all levels to share information and ongoing actions as part of the monitoring and governance arrangements at the home.

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 management team and 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. Staff arranged support from partner agencies and continued people’s regular routine health checks, for example, with dentists, opticians and chiropodists.

The management team and provider had created links with the local community to enhance the lives of people living at the home. The home has a publicly accessible defibrillator outside the home providing rapid access to life-saving equipment in the event of a cardiac emergency. This would help to improve outcomes for people living at the home, staff, visitors, and the wider community. The management team had links with the local scouts who often came to help maintain the garden, and with local colleges. Students with additional needs completed work experience at the home to gain skills. There was excitement in the home as everyone was preparing for the forthcoming fete where peoples, relatives, visitors and the community were invited.

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.

The management team and provider demonstrated their commitment to making their home as safe as possible and used systems effectively to improve people’s experience and outcomes. There was a commitment to learning and continuous improvement. The provider had several mechanisms in place to maintain oversight of the home this included weekly and monthly reports from the management team, regular visits and audits completed by higher management, and mock inspections by external companies. The home regularly sought feedback from health and social care professionals, people, relatives and the staff team. A continual service improvement plan gave an oversight of actions and improvements that had been identified and when they were to be completed.