St Neots Neurological 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

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 as 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.

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.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture.

Senior leaders had 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 they were all clear about the aims of their service. The provider’s vision was ‘Putting the individual at the heart of all aspects of the care we deliver’ and staff knew how to demonstrate this in their day to day work.

The providers neurological pathway followed an ‘EveryExpert’ model that aimed for every patient to have the best clinical experts working collaboratively to provide person-centred care.

The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and supported and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. They had the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively.

Leaders were visible in the service and approachable for patients and staff. Staff felt supported and valued by leaders and described a positive culture where staff felt comfortable to raise any concerns or suggestions.

Leaders had a good understanding of the service, their patients and their needs, and were visible on the wards.

The service aimed to create a positive culture where people felt that they could speak up and that their voice would be heard.

Staff said they knew how to raise a concern and would feel comfortable to do so. They were aware of the service’s whistleblowing policy and the freedom to speak up guardian. The service displayed posters in staff areas to ensure all staff knew how to raise any concerns.

The service held staff forums where all staff could raise any concerns or suggestions.

The service 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 diversity, equality and inclusion policy in place that aimed to make sure no-one experienced direct or indirect discrimination because of a protected characteristic.

The provider had an objective to be an anti-racist organisation and had a zero tolerance policy. Managers encouraged and supported staff to report any racial abuse to the police.

The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance 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.

Our findings from the other key questions demonstrated that governance processes operated effectively and that performance and risk were managed well.

We reviewed examples of governance and staff meeting minutes. There was a clear framework of what must be discussed at staff and team meetings to ensure that essential information, such as learning from incidents and complaints, was shared. The service had a tracker in place for actions arising from governance meetings and staff implemented actions from audits, incidents and complaints.

The service had an audit programme in place at both local and provider level. Managers maintained and had access to the risk register. Staff at ward level could access this and escalate concerns when required. The service had business continuity plans in place.

The service understood their duty to work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people.

Staff worked closely with external partners such as commissioners and the local authority, including the local authority safeguarding team who attended the service safeguarding meetings.

The service had close links with local physical health services including GP surgeries, dentists, podiatrists, opticians, district nurses and the neurology department at Addenbrookes Hospital. The service also worked with specialist organisations including Headway, who offered support to patients with a brain injury; The Stroke Association; Community occupational therapists and physiotherapists; and organisations providing specialist mobility and assistive technology equipment.

The service encouraged continuous learning, innovation and improvement.

The service had retained its outstanding accreditation rating with Headway under their approved provider scheme. Headway are a charity who offer support to people with an acquired brain injury.

The service had a quality improvement plan in place that was discussed and reviewed at clinical governance meetings.