Cranbrook 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.

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.

The services mission was to ensure people received personalised care that improved the quality of life for each person they supported. This was done through ensuring personalised care plans were in place and audits were completed to ensure people received person centred and safe care.

Staff told us the culture within the service was positive and they were supported when needed. A staff member said, “The culture is always good, we can share anything and are supported always.”

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and were clear about their responsibilities. They understood their roles and told us the management team supported them.

The management team operated an ‘open door’ policy where people, relatives and staff could speak to them at any time to ensure there was an open culture where concerns could be raised and acted upon.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care.

The management team knew people well and were committed in improving the service to ensure people received high quality care.

The management team held staff meetings regularly. Agenda items included a range of topics such as performance, care delivery and medicine management. Management also gave staff opportunities to provide feedback on the service through surveys.

There was no registered manager in post at the time of the assessment. The nominated individual told us that they were in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission.

Staff were positive about the management. A staff member told us, “My manager (nominated individual) is very supportive and always helps when I need it.”

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

A whistleblowing policy was in place that included details on how to raise concerns both internally and externally, which allowed staff freedom to speak up. Staff feedback was also sought as part of supervisions and staff meeting. Whistleblowing is the act of reporting wrongdoing, misconduct, or illegal activities within an organisation.

Systems were in place for staff to raise concerns internally and externally. Staff knew how to use the whistleblowing policy and understood their role and responsibilities of reporting concerns and knew who to go to if they needed 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 valued diversity in their workforce. Systems were in place for flexible working arrangements as shift plans showed staff were able to work flexibly. Staff did not have any concerns with lack of support and were positive about the service and the management team valuing diversity.

Minutes from staff meetings demonstrated that staff were fully informed about service developments and staff were able to provide feedback at these meetings. The provider encouraged an open-door policy, allowing staff to raise concerns or suggestions comfortably.

The provider had a clear equality and diversity policy to ensure that neither staff nor people using the service were subjected to discrimination.

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.

At our last inspection, we found robust governance systems were not in place such as regular audits were not being carried out. At this assessment, we found improvements had been made.

Records showed the provider had quality assurance systems in place to ensure regular audits were carried out. Care plan audits were completed to ensure care plans were personalised. Medicine audits were completed to ensure people were given their medicines as prescribed and staff were competent to administer medicines. Health and safety audits were being completed to ensure people received safe and effective care.

Systems were in place to receive feedback from people and staff through reviews, surveys and as part of staff supervisions and meetings.

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

The nominated individual and staff told us they worked in partnership with health and social professionals to ensure people were always in the best of health. Records confirmed people had access to social and health professionals and community services to ensure they were in the best of health.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.

There were a range of monitoring and audit tools to assess and monitor the delivery of care and support to people.

The service had systems in place for learning and to improve the quality of the service with feedback being sought from people and staff to ensure there was a culture of continuous improvement and to support the management team on enhancing overall service quality. A recent survey for people showed people were positive about the service.