Longton Court

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.

Systems and processes focused on people and meeting their individual needs. Information about the goals of the service were shared in briefings and team meetings.

The service quality improvement plan had a focus on learning and the development of staff skills. Staff were provided with additional responsibilities, for example being part of a smaller team focusing on areas such as health and safety or behaviour analysis.

The culture of the service was observed to be inclusive and compassionate. There appeared to be trust and understanding between staff and people who lived at the service. Staff were passionate about providing care to people. Their comments included, “We know what we are working towards and have a steer around our direction” and “We are aware of the service user’s challenges and there is good communication between the team.”

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 manager of the service had recently transferred their registration to a different home for the same provider but was still working at the service during our inspection. People and staff spoke positively about the manager. They felt they had the knowledge, skills and experience needed to be a good leader. We observed the manager was very involved in the day to day running of the service and made time to speak with people and staff.

The provider and manager encouraged staff to develop by supporting them with opportunities to further their skills and training.

The manager and staff team had support available to them from the senior management and psychology teams. Staff were positive about the support they received. Staff told us, “The organisation is supportive. Management has an open door” and “All the managers are approachable.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider valued and listened to the views of staff. Staff were encouraged to contribute their ideas about what the service did well and what they could do better during regular individual and group meetings with their line managers and fellow co-workers. Staff understood the importance of speaking up and confirmed they were encouraged to speak up and they had received relevant training to support this. Staff told us, “I would always raise concerns” and There’s a policy about what we have to do, and rules, I would tell the manager and tell the CQC, always take it higher if I need 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.

The provider ensured the policies and procedures supported equality, diversity and human rights to guide staff on best practice. Staff were encouraged to discuss their well-being, achievements and any additional support they needed during their supervisions. The manager took action to address any concerns raised around staff culture and clear expectations were shared with staff. Staff told us they felt valued and supported. Comments included, “Yes I am supported with my well-being” and “We’re a skilled team. We work well together. We all have different backgrounds, so we all bring different things.”

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.

At our last inspection, the provider’s governance systems had failed to pick up and/or address the issues we identified in relation to management of infection prevention and control and the safe management of medicines. This had placed people at risk of harm and represented a breach of regulations.

At this inspection we found the provider had made enough improvements to ensure their established governance systems were effectively operated. This meant the service was no longer in breach of regulations.

Governance systems were used to regularly check and audit the quality and safety of the care and support provided to people. The outcomes of these checks and audits were used to identify performance shortfalls which fed into the service quality improvement plan. This aimed to continuously improve the quality and safety of the service people received. Managers and staff demonstrated a good understanding of their governance roles and responsibilities in relation to assessing, monitoring, and managing the quality and safety of the service they provided. Medicines audits had identified the shortfall we found in relation to a reason not always being recorded when as required medicines were administered. Ways to improve the recording of people’s medicines was also discussed during daily staff briefing meetings and team meetings. The service improvement plan had several actions around medicines which were being worked on.

The manager understood their responsibilities in relation to regulatory requirements around notifiable incidents. Our records indicated they continued to notify the CQC in a timely manner about any incidents and events they were legally required to.

The provider’s senior management team completed monitoring visits. A report was completed following each visit where good practice and any areas for improvement could be noted and fed back to staff. A member of the senior management team had recently completed an audit of people’s daily care records. Findings had been shared with the manager, and feedback was being provided to staff in meetings and supervisions to drive improvements in this area. Members of the provider’s specialist psychology team also spent time regularly in the service and supported the team in any specific areas which had been identified.

Team leaders understood that they had additional responsibilities and were clear about the expectations of their role. Staff said the service was organised and well-managed.

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 service encouraged partnership working and advocated on behalf of people to ensure they received effective care. Referrals for people were made as needed.

We received positive feedback from partners and stakeholders. They told us the service worked collaboratively with them, and they had no concerns for people’s welfare. Health and social care professionals told us, “Any information requested is provided really promptly” and “The care team consistently demonstrates a collaborative and joined-up approach in their communication, whether by phone or email.”

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 service encouraged people to be involved in developing their own support plans for crisis situations they might face. Support plans and risk assessments were regularly measured and outcomes evaluated. The specialist psychology team in the organisation supported this. Staff took part in detailed daily briefing meetings which included proactive risk management and supported learning lessons, reflection and problem solving. Staff told us these meetings helped them to improve the ways they supported people. Their comments included, “It helps me in the job, things like how best to understand people’s triggers and how to help them” and “They look at why something’s happened, we share information, and we learn from it to make changes next time.”

The provider held internal training sessions for staff who worked across their services. This was an opportunity to discuss specific areas of concern and problem solve together. Staff told us they found this very beneficial. One staff member said, “It's very useful and promoted great conversations.”