Frognal House Care 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.

The last rating for this key question was good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people received a service that was well led.

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 service 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 provider had a values statement and policies and procedures in place, setting out expectations and values on how staff should work and behave. Staff were aware of the policies and procedures and how they could be accessed for reflection. Information was communicated and shared effectively with staff through daily 10 at 10 meetings, supervisions and regular staff meetings. One member of staff told us, “Staff have handover meetings in the mornings and evenings. We talk about what residents need for example, if someone has not eaten or drank or if someone has slept all day. The staff will pay extra attention to these residents.”

The service 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 capable and inclusive leaders. The service had a home manager in post. They were in the process of registering to become the registered manager for the service and were knowledgeable about their responsibilities regarding the Health and Social Care Act 2014. They were aware of the types of significant events which they were required to notify CQC about and records showed the service had submitted notifications to CQC where needed. The home manager was supported by senior managers. The regional director visited the service regularly to provide them with support and to help to improve the quality of care at the service.

Staff told us they felt happy and supported working at the service. A staff member commented, “This is a lovely place to work. Teamwork is very good; we all pull together to get things done for the residents. The managers really care about the staff, they make me feel wanted and appreciated.”

Staff told us management support was available for them when they needed it. There was a 24 hour on-call number where staff could contact managers if they need any advice or support.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us there were effective systems in place for them to raise any concerns and they felt confident action would be taken if they used them. A staff member told us, “The staff meetings are an avenue for us to express our views and opinions, we are listened to and anything we suggest is acted on immediately. For example, at a recent meeting I told managers we were running low on pill pots. They provided these to me the same morning.”

Staff told us they attended regular staff meetings. We saw the minutes from a Town Hall Meeting held in August 2025. Items on the agenda included, staff survey, staff training, health and safety, an update on the home’s refurbishment, the use of mobile phones, a staff thank you board, key-working and planned events for September. Staff were able to ask questions and provide their feedback at the meeting.

We saw the minutes from one unit’s team meeting held in August 2025. Issues discussed at this meeting included topics for example, lessons learned, peoples individual care needs, falls, medicines, equality and diversity, moving and handling and staff’s professional conduct. One staff member told us, “The staff meetings are informative, we meet with managers and talk about how we can improve care for the residents. For example, I recently brought up how we could improve people’s independence. The cups were too heavy for some residents to drink from, so we got lighter cups for them to use. This really improved people’s fluid intake as well.” Another staff member told us, “The staff meetings are good, we talk about what the residents need, for example we can suggest new activities. Everyone is free to speak.”

Information about how to raise concerns was displayed throughout the building. Records demonstrated staff were encouraged to raise any concerns during team meetings and individual meetings with their supervisor, which were followed up.

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 supported staff to feel included and treated them with equity, taking account of their individual needs. A staff member told us, “The managers respect the staff’s diversity and different cultures, they are welcoming and always ask me how I am. I feel the managers make sure the staff feel supported.”

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.

The provider had systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. We saw a report from a provider visit carried out by the regional director on 31 July 2025. The report identified that most of the areas looked at had been met, where areas were not fully met an action was recorded for the home manager to follow up. For example, 1 staff member’s medicines competency had not been assessed and an action for a complaint was overdue by 2 days. The home manager had recorded that all the actions had been completed.

We saw a report from an unannounced nighttime spot check carried out at the service on the 23 September 2025. The deputy manager told us these checks were carried out to make sure staff were supporting people in line with their care needs. It was identified that night staff had not completed refresher training on fire safety. The deputy manager confirmed with us that these staff had now completed it or had been booked to complete this training in the near future.

Audits and checks were in place to oversee good service delivery and ensure people’s safety. Audits covered areas such as, medicines, health and safety, fire safety, infection control, falls, care plans, safeguarding, complaints and incidents and accidents. Checks were also carried out on the environments, wheelchairs, baths, call bells and hoisting equipment.

The provider clearly understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They always shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The home manager told us they worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals and organisations. These included the local authority, palliative care teams, speech and language therapists and nurses amongst others. Visiting professional to the service who we spoke with gave positive feedback about their experience of working with the service to meet people’s needs.

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.

There were systems in place for learning. These included regular training sessions for staff, staff meetings and supervisions. The home manager discussed learning from accidents, incidents and complaints with staff. There were clear systems in place for monitoring the standards of care provided and these were used to identify any areas of improvement and lessons learned. These included regular audits and quality assurance checks.