Hopscotch Women’s 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 75 (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.

There was a person-centred culture, and the provider demonstrated eagerness to learn and develop to continually improve. This was demonstrated by close collaboration with the local authority teams to expand learning that would support a strengths-based approach to care and how this could improve outcomes for people.

Staff we spoke to shared this vision and enthusiasm to learn how to better support people where possible.

Leaders were involved in local provider forums and safeguarding boards, which provided oversight of commonly experienced challenges to care as well as allowing for learning from the experience of others. Such learning was shared with staff with an aim to making clear where any changes might come from and demonstrate how they work for others.

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.

Senior staff members including care coordinators and the registered manager, had a working experience of delivering care.

Staff we spoke with told us they felt leaders listened to them and understood some of the challenges they faced.

Leaders were active in trying to maintain a work force able to work together and support each other as care work can often be isolating. They had done this by creating and encouraging use of a shared chat thread, regular team meetings and by offering space for care staff in the office premises.

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

Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns with leaders. They were aware of the escalation processes with leaders.

Staff said that although they felt listened to, there was mixed response of whether action was always taken as a result. Staff understood that change was not always possible but felt this could be explained more clearly so they understood why.

We saw a whistleblowing policy which supported staff to raise concerns externally if they needed to. Staff we spoke with were not familiar with this policy, though did express comfort in raising concerns with senior staff members.

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 service had a recruitment policy which included flexible working for those who required adjustments. A staff member we spoke with was working flexibly due to a physical disability which meant care visits assigned to them resulted in a smaller amount of travel.

Some people employed were also allowed to work a limited number of hours around study and the service worked to ensure this could happen around those commitments.

There was a varied workforce at the service from a range of backgrounds and cultures. Some of those employed also had additional language skills which reflected those in the local community.

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.

There were clear quality assurance processes in place. This included auditing of care logs and plans, staff supervision and observations of care delivery. These recorded clearly any actions to be carried forward and learning.

Leaders shared relevant information with other agencies including CQC and local partners in a timely way and were responsive to any requests for further detail.

Information of emerging risk or incidents of concern was shared promptly with staff via the messaging system all had access to on their work devices.

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.

Leaders had good partnerships with other providers through management forums and safeguarding boards. They attended quarterly quality meetings with local authority commissioners. The role of field care supervisors who supported staff and people meant there was a visible presence and interaction within the community.

We saw evidence of feedback being sought from people and staff with the outcomes of these shared with relevant groups.

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.

Additional opportunities for learning were sought to complement existing care practice. This included training and workshops in trauma informed working, strengths-based approaches, transgender needs and working with people with autism. The service also engaged with the local authority test and learn project, local provider networks and pan London safeguarding boards.

This meant not only did the service learn from their own working experiences but also from those of other providers and people themselves.