Magnolia House

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 is the first assessment for this service since registration under the new provider. 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 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.

Everyone we spoke with was positive about the home’s atmosphere and culture. One person said, “It is very good here. The staff are very helpful and kind, and it is a pleasure to be here.” Another described the carers as “lovely” and “very dedicated.” A relative said, “They are so kind and do more than they need to. They are very caring. Thumbs up for here-it’s five-star living.”

The management team was committed to providing a caring, person-centred service which promoted people’s rights and there was a culture of openness, learning and continuous improvement. The management team provided effective leadership that had fostered an inclusive culture. Discussions with staff and our observations whilst at the home reflected this ethos. We observed staff were respectful, caring and committed to providing good quality care and treatment to people living at Magnolia House.

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 demonstrated they had the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively.

Throughout the assessment the management team demonstrated they were dedicated and passionate about their roles and wanted to ensure people had a good quality of life and received safe, effective and high-quality care. They were fully responsive to any issues or concerns we raised during our assessment and acted to address these.

The manager was supported by a deputy manager and people, staff and relatives described them as working well together and ‘a good team.’ People, relatives and staff told us the management team was approachable, they knew who they were and felt confident any issues raised would be addressed. Throughout the inspection we observed the management team actively interacting with people, relatives and staff in a kind and respectful way.

People and relatives spoke positively about the overall management of the service. Comments included, “Everything at the home is so good”, "I know my relative is in good hands. It is a very friendly place", "The manager is so understanding and easy to talk to” and "Without doubt I would recommend the home.”

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

People and relatives were encouraged to raise any concerns about the service. All the people we spoke with described the manager and deputy manager as approachable and told us they felt able to raise any concerns.

Staff spoken with told us they felt able to speak up and they would be listened to. There was also an open-door policy which meant staff were welcomed to approach the management team at any time to discuss issues and concerns and to share ideas and feedback.

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.

There was a diverse workforce. The management team demonstrated a commitment to workforce equality, diversity, and inclusion and staff’s cultural heritage was respected. Most staff undertook equality and diversity training, and we observed the service promoted a culture of equal opportunity, respect and positive team working.

The staff we spoke with were happy working at the service. They felt valued and fairly treated.

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.

Staff told us about their duties and responsibilities; how they managed risk and reported concerns to management. Managers and staff understood their roles, and were clear about quality performance, risks and regulatory requirements.

Since being in post, the manager had made a number of changes in relation to the auditing and governance processes within the home to help ensure appropriate standards of quality and safety were maintained. These changes had positively impacted the service, and staff and relatives talked about recent overall improvements, including increased staffing levels and involvement.

The manager and provider ensured regular checks and audits were completed, including those related to medicines, the environment, care documentation and staffing levels. On review of the governance arrangements in place, we found the management team had identified some areas where improvements were required. This had resulted in effective actions to be taken and detailed service improvement plans to be developed. This demonstrated the providers systems were effective and responsive.

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.

Staff understood the importance of sharing information with healthcare professionals such as when there were changes in people’s health. Care records confirmed the service worked with other health professionals to ensure people’s needs were met effectively. People were positive about the support they received and felt supported with their healthcare needs.

The views of people using the service, their relatives and staff were sought using both formal and informal processes including, face to face meetings, questionnaires and general conversations. Feedback was analysed and acted on.

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.

There was a culture of continuous improvement by ensuring systems were in place to promote continued oversight of the overall governance of the service. This helped to ensure areas which required improvement were identified and the lessons learned could be shared. People and staff had opportunity to share ideas which were listened to and acted on ensuring continual learning.

At the time of our assessment there was an ongoing action plan in place which detailed any actions required that had been identified through the services governance systems or highlighted through stakeholders. The management team were open to feedback provided during and following the site visits and were committed to making any necessary improvements.