Bradford Regional Office

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 68 (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. There were clear visions and values in place, this included being: ‘Brave, Honest, Caring and Compassionate, Positive, Professional, and Responsive.’ Staff received a magazine which shared information, key dates and guidance. Staff received regular supervisions and appraisals, which focused on professional development and providing support to staff. Staff received training in a range of subjects to enable them to provide good care to people. Staff also had their competencies assessed in a range of subjects, to ensure they could effectively carry out their roles, such as managing finances and fire safety.

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. There were clear management structures in place, and the leadership team held regular meetings to ensure effective communication across the homes. Staff felt supported by the management team. A staff member said, “Staff morale is positive. It is a good place to work, we all work together as a team.” Most people and relatives told us the service was well led. A relative said, “I would feel confident to call the manager if I had any concerns. They are fully supportive of me. There is good communication between me and the house. The manager has worked with [name] since they first moved in.” The management team understood their responsibilities under duty of candour and reported notifiable incidents where required.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Most people and relatives told us they could speak to the managers and action would be taken to address concerns. There were clear procedures and information in place, to enable staff to raise concerns. Staff told us managers were approachable, and they felt able to report concerns. Staff were involved in regular group supervisions, where key events, suggestions and concerns could be discussed. Checks were made on the service, to ensure there were no closed cultures developing within the homes.

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. Staff told us no one had been subject to any form of discrimination, and the provider had clear policies regarding equality and diversity. Staff were provided with information and handbooks, which included information about professional development and core values of the service. Staff were supported to gain further qualifications through an apprentice scheme, such as training about health and social care and leadership and management. Staff had received information about fair pay within the adult social care sector.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. Whilst several audits were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service, some improvements were required to ensure all accidents and incidents were effectively monitored, with clear oversight and lessons learned. Senior management quality audits were in place, and the service had recently used an external agency to conduct a quality audit. Complaints were investigated and actioned, however complaints logs did not contain details where complaints had been made via the Care Quality Commission (CQC). This was discussed with the registered manager on the day of our assessment, who assured us these would be included, to ensure they had effective oversight of how many complaints were made and any themes to action.

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 supported people in the community, to promote their independence and activities of daily living, such as food shopping, health appointments and attending the bank to manage their finances. People had access to a communal garden, where they had garden parties a communal space inside. One person was supported to attend a day centre which focused on providing people with living skills and activities.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The management team were working closely with the local authority to embed improvements and were currently working on implementing a new system to monitor and manage accidents and incidents. This required embedding into practice at the time of our assessment. On the day of our assessment, we also discussed ensuring the service could evidence where it was driving improvements in the service on a continuous basis. The provider was nominated for national care awards, which celebrated high achieving services. People were offered opportunities to give feedback about their care, records evidenced people were happy living at the service.