Wey House Nursing Home

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 improved and is now 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.

Staff were kept informed about changes and had regular meetings to discuss their views. Minutes of these meetings showed staff were kept informed about changes and improvements and lessons learned were shared. There was also daily shared learning at a flash meeting with heads of departments.

The registered manager and staff actively sought the views of people and their families through face-to-face meetings.As part of the new process, called ‘person of the day’ staff were required to contact relatives where appropriate to discuss any changes.

The area manager confirmed an annual survey was completed and areas identified were acted upon.

The registered manager had implemented a regular newsletter to keep everybody informed.

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 was a strong management team at the home, which worked well together. There was a passion from them about the home and they all knew their roles and responsibilities. The managing director was at the home to support the management team at the assessment.

The registered manager was positive about the improvements which had been made and was open and honest about further improvements which were needed. She was particularly proud of the improvements in communication and transparency with families working together and rebuilding the trust.

People and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and her team saying they had found them very approachable and helpful but wanted continuity. Comments included “There has been a large turnover in managers, there has been a few years of being managerless. We have a new manager and seems okay”, “I think she is brilliant and she has a lovely way with her, she is a very responsive person and she asks how we both are, which is lovely, she is very grounded, a very nice positive person” and “My impression is that she is nice and listens and comes across as she is professional and listens and so we shouldn’t have any issues.”

The registered manager and clinical lead were visible around the home on each day of the assessment, supporting the staff team and the assessment process. They had a very good understanding of people’s needs and were working with staff to ensure these were met. Throughout the assessment process they demonstrated integrity, openness and honesty.

They had been working with staff so there was clear accountability at the home, with staff understanding their roles and responsibilities.

Staff spoke positively about the new registered manager and management at the home. Comments included, “Getting better at the moment. Current managers are approachable and talking to us. They care about us and the people here. They have bought stability”, “Supportive environment and managers” and “Feels a lot more settled on the up. Split in manager and clinical lead is really good. (Registered manager) is really good and has the skills needed.” An agency worker told us, “Staff are always good. New manager really supportive. Never any issues here."

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

A recent culture audit had identified the culture at the home was an area where improvements needed to be made. The management team were working with staff to change this. The staff team were positive about working at the home and happy working together to make the improvements needed. We observed staff working well together, planning, and supporting each other.

There were processes for raising concerns and providing feedback. The provider had clear information in place for people and for staff on how to raise concerns, including clear complaints and whistle blowing policies.

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 registered manager and clinical lead engaged with staff to involve them with the running of the service. The had an open-door policy, regular staff meetings and worked alongside staff so they could speak openly.

Staff spoke positively about the improvements being made at the home and said they were starting to feel like a family.

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.

There was a robust programme of checks, monitoring and audits which identified areas for improvement. The management team had a recovery plan and the providers CAP (corrective action plan). It was evident some concerns we identified at our visit had been already identified by the management team. Actions were in place to resolve the concerns. Our visit helped to prioritise these actions.

The management team dealt with complaints in line with the provider’s complaints policy. We discussed 2 complaints received by the management team. It was evident they had taken the concerns seriously and acted upon them.

The provider requested feedback from people, their relatives, staff and professionals on an annual basis, via a survey and we were told actions were taken.

Theprovider’s audits had been completed. Where audits had identified areas of concern these had been acted upon with action plans put into place. Improvements were made during our assessment to ensure there was a clear delegation and monitoring process for these action plans.

The provider monitored the service through their own quarterly governance review. These assessments were now effective at identifying where the improvements were needed.

Staff were regularly involved in meetings and told us they had opportunities to discuss their ideas, opinions and contribute to the governance of the service.

The registered manager ensured we were notified of all events they were required to tell us about.

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 worked in partnership with other agencies, they had good working relationships and contacted them whenever required.

A relative told us, “Management have been great making referrals to other professionals really quickly.”

Health and social care professionals told us the home worked well with them to meet people’s needs. However, professionals mentioned there had been instability at the home, which had caused some concerns. Comments included, “The clinical lead takes a thorough interest in the clients.” Another said, (clinical lead) is very communicative about any issues or concerns and seems confident to contact myself or my colleague if she wants advice” and “The Clinical Lead has been consistent and know patients well we hope that with the support of a new manager, the home will become more responsive, and staff will feel supported.”

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 learning at the homeand a passion from everyone we spoke with, to get it right for people and staff. The provider had developed a recovery plan which they were working through. For example, they had identified that agency nurses needed to have a clear understanding of what was required when they were on duty at the home. This had been actioned, and a folder was in place, detailing these requirements, with checklists, incident reporting, equipment available and emergency contacts. The management team had also sought feedback from agency nurses about the effectiveness of the folder.

There was recognition of what had gone wrong in the past and where the concerns were. Areas we mentioned on our first day were listened to and acted upon. For example, a photo board of staff, staff uniforms for the nurses and senior staff, medicine room changes, making the home more homely and improvements to medicine management.

The provider introduced an electronic care system during our assessment. This had been well planned and executed. Staff had been trained, and a specialist team were working at the home to support the transition. The registered manager had used the system before and was confident it would enable the management team to monitor people’s care from the electronic records and identify any areas that needed to be addressed.

Training was up to date and additional training was sourced if appropriate if requested by staff. However, one staff member told us there were not many opportunities to learn and develop in their role. The management team told us about how they were working with staff to access higher qualifications in health and social care to further their careers.

The provider had a clear process to oversee accidents, incidents and injuries.

Staff said they felt supported and were able to share ideas in their supervision meetings and staff meetings.