Archived: Nicholas 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

The service had a positive culture that was open and friendly. Throughout the assessment, the registered manager demonstrated a good knowledge of the people living at Nicholas Court. It was evident they wanted to provide a good quality and person-centred service. Staff spoke highly of the registered manager. Comments included, “I can talk to the manager. She’s very approachable,” and “The registered manager walks around, talks to people, chats to them.”

Staff were provided with training and guidance in how to provide person centred care. Regular one to one supervision meetings and staff meetings ensured staff were aware of and working to the provider’s vision and culture in meeting people’s person-centred needs.

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 registered manager was experienced, skilled, knowledgeable, and was committed to providing a welcoming care home. There was a clear management structure that ensured staff had effective support and guidance at all times. The registered manager understood their legal responsibilities and kept up to date with relevant changes and notified CQC as required by law. The provider maintained oversight of the care home with regular visits, audits and accessing the electronic system remotely.

Staff told us the service was led by suitably competent and approachable registered manager. The feedback we received from staff about the registered manager was positive. A staff member said, “The registered manager is good, helpful and accessible.” The management team motivated and recognised staff efforts by giving gift vouchers during the Christmas holidays.

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

Staff were provided with the relevant policies and procedures detailing what was expected of staff working for the service. Staff told us they felt able to raise any issues or concerns, including poor practice. Staff were confident senior staff would listen to them. They understood the whistleblowing policy with staff telling us how they feel empowered to report concerns by the registered manager.

Processes to seek the views of staff were well embedded; this included regular team meetings and individual staff supervisions. Where meetings were held, these were recorded, allowing staff who were unable to attend to review the content.

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 were processes for staff recruitment and induction. Staff received training relevant to their roles. Staff felt respected and able to work in an environment that was supportive and free from discrimination. Support and reasonable adjustments were in place for staff when needed.

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.

Audits and monitoring supported the management team to independently identify and address shortfalls or improvements. Lessons were learned and disseminated to staff where required.

Action plans were in place where improvements had been identified by the provider in their own quality checks. Where improvements were made these were documented.

The registered manager told us how the provider referred to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to ensure people with a learning disability and autistic people received respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities, in all aspects of the care provision and governance systems. This was evident this guidance was being followed in our findings during this assessment.

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 registered manager and staff worked closely with a variety of health and social care professionals to ensure people’s individual care and support needs were known, understood and met by staff. People’s care records confirmed referrals were made to health professionals when required and instructions given had been followed. This demonstrated collaborative approach care.

The registered manager regularly attended the local authority providers meetings where they learned about and shared good practice. At a recent meeting the local authority talked about unsafe discharge from hospital. The registered manager told us they shared this with the staff team.

The local authority responsible for some people’s care and health professionals told us management and staff had worked collaboratively. They told us when issues and concerns had arisen the registered manager had been open, transparent and responsive to ensure people remained safe.

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 were systems in place to aid staff with learning. These included regular training sessions for staff and staff supervisions. There were regular carer meetings focussed on learning.

The registered manager had clear oversight of accidents and incidents. They discussed learning from accidents, incidents and complaints with staff. They regularly undertook audits of these to ensure any trends or patterns were identified and addressed. People and their relatives had opportunities to feedback their views about the service and quality of the care they received. There was a service improvement plan which was regularly reviewed and updated.

Feedback received from health professionals and the local authority as part of this assessment confirmed the management and staff worked with them to continuously to provide quality care. The local authority’s latest quality monitoring visit was positive, and no actions were required.