Tallington Lodge 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. 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 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.

People, relatives and staff were happy with the present leadership at the service. Relatives and staff told us there had been some issues prior to the present manager coming into post, with relatives and staff not feeling supported. However, over the last few months with the appointment of the new home manager and involvement of the senior management team both relatives and staff feedback was there had been improvements in communication. The senior managers had been responsive when issues were highlighted to them. One staff member said, “We feel things have improved, we feel very supported.”

Throughout our site visits we saw examples of how the home manager had worked with people, their relatives and staff to improve the care people received. The home manager led by example to build a culture of compassion, openness and integrity. The home manager made sure they were visible and accessible to people and we saw evidence of how they continued to work with people, relatives and staff addressing issues in an open and responsive way.

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

The home manager worked to ensure people, families and staff had the confidence to speak up if they had any concerns about any aspect of the care provided. We saw evidence of communication with people and families that showed a commitment from the management team support people to speak up if they had any issues of concern. There were regular staff meetings and staff had regular supervision meetings which they told us they found helpful. One member of staff told us they could request a supervision meeting if they had anything they felt they needed to discuss with their line manager. They felt able to talk about things openly and they would be taken seriously. Another member of staff said, “There is a nice atmosphere (at the service) and we get a lot of support from the manager.”

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 service had a diverse workforce and had employed workers from overseas at the service. Staff we spoke with felt valued by the provider. One staff member said, “We are treated very well here.” Our observations at the service evidenced this. Staff were happy to come and speak with us. There were many positive comments from all the staff we spoke with. One person who had only worked at the service for six month told us they had a good induction to their role. They said, “My colleagues and managers were very helpful.” Staff felt this culture of inclusiveness among the staff groups had a positive effect on people’s care. Another staff member said, “The teams are supportive to each other, and people are engaged in activities.”

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 majority of the provider’s governance processes were being used effectively by the management team. However, quality monitoring processes hadn’t highlighted the issue we found around medicines stocks and recorded balances. As reported in the safe section of this report the management team responded to the issue and reviewed the auditing processes to ensure effective monitoring in the future.

Since being in post the home manager had also reviewed quality monitoring responsibilities at the service and had effective processes in place to monitor and address risk. For example, there was evidence of good oversight of people’s weights, skin integrity and falls risks. This had resulted in people being well supported in these areas and had produced good outcomes for people.

There were robust processes in place to ensure effective oversight of management of equipment and the environment, at both location and provider level. The provider’s Risk and Compliance manager worked closely with the home manager and their team on site to ensure regular audits were undertaken, followed by an action plan to show who was responsible for actions and when they should be completed. We saw how the provider’s interactive electronic system was used by both the management and maintenance team on site and the Risk and compliance manager to show the progress of actions, allowing the team to use a ‘live chat’ to discuss any issues with actions.

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 staff at the service worked in collaboration with external health professionals who supported people living at the home. We saw people had been referred to different health professionals when they needed support with an aspect of their care. One health professional told us there had been improvements at the service over the last few months, leading to quicker communication and collaboration between themselves and staff at the service. They felt they had been listened to by the home manager when they discussed issues. They told us this had resulted in staff having further training in areas such as recognising skin tissue damage early to ensure effective treatment for people.