Gladstones Clinic Cotswolds

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

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 and fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. However, Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles. Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they applied this in practice. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. Teams had access to the information they needed to provide safe and effective care. However, There were no systems in place to ensure the service was performing well clinically.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Well-led.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Well-led.

Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they were applied in the work of their team.

The provider’s senior leadership team had successfully communicated the provider’s vision and values to the frontline staff in this service.

Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they were applied in the work of their team.

Staff could explain how they were working to deliver high quality care within the budgets available.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles. However, they did not have access to sufficiently detailed governance information to manage the service appropriately.

Leaders had a good understanding of the service. They could explain clearly how the teams were working to provide high quality care.

Leaders were visible in the service and approachable.

Leadership development opportunities were available, including opportunities for staff.

Clients and carers had opportunities to give feedback on the service they received in a manner that reflected their individual needs.

Managers and staff had access to the feedback from clients, carers and staff and used it to make improvements.

Clients and carers were involved in decision-making about changes to the service.

Clients and staff could meet with senior leaders and governors to give feedback.

Staff were able to apply to work flexibly. flexible working agreements to account for personal circumstances such as caring responsibilities and health issues.

Managers put reasonable adjustments in place for staff members to help them carry out their role.

The provider undertook equality monitoring to support the diversity of staff within the service to ensure it is diverse in its make-up and representative of the patient group.

Team meeting agendas were robust. Learning from incidents and complaints, was shared and discussed. However, the governance systems for measuring client progress were underdeveloped. Client progress was measured using a patient satisfaction, but the service was not using clinical outcome scales to measure the success of its clinical interventions

Staff undertook and participated in local clinical audits. The audits provided assurance and staff acted when needed.

Staff understood the arrangements for working with other teams, both within the provider and external, to meet the needs of the clients.

Staff concerns matched those on the risk register.

The service had contingency plans, for example, adverse weather or a flu outbreak.

Staff had access to the equipment and information technology needed to do their work.

Team managers had access to information to support them with their management role. This included information on staffing and patient care.

Clients and staff could meet with members of the provider’s senior leadership team to give feedback.

The service was not currently involved in any research projects

Staff used measures to measure service performance, the main one being client satisfaction

The provider adhered to ISO 9001, a framework for improving a quality management system across the organisation.