Eagle Wood Neurological Care Centre

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

The provider had a range of policies and procedures that guided staff on how to support people in a safe, effective, caring and responsive way. The registered manager and nominated individual promoted an open and positive culture at the care home. This allowed the service to consistently learn and further improve outcomes for people.

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 registered manager and nominated individual had taken effective steps to ensure staff understood and demonstrated the vision and culture of the service. Staff told us a positive culture was at the service and spoke positively of the leadership they received from their managers. The registered manager and nominated individual spoke passionately about their commitment to learn and further drive improvements where possible, at the care home.

One staff member told us, “A lot of people can become numbers. And our residents are not numbers, they are individuals. Some days are harder than others, and you go home feeling like you have done the best for [the people].” Another staff member said, “I am listened to. [There is] absolutely a positive learning culture. [Managers encourage staff] to bring things forward [ideas], even little things.”

Staff told us they had good communication within the team, which included managers, colleagues and staff who worked in different departments, such as the therapy or kitchen teams. One staff member said, “I do like it here, it is a good team, and I work across all the units.”

The provider ensured training, policies and procedures were in place to support staff to undertake their roles. The organisation had a culture to invest in staff and provide opportunities for their professional growth. Recognition programmes were in place, and staff and the provider were recognised and celebrated during national care and business awards for their industry contribution.

The registered manager and nominated individual were both visible at the care home and transparent with us throughout the assessment timeframe. Staff spoken to told us they felt supported in their role and gave us examples of how managers provided effective leadership and development. For example, 1 staff member told us, “[Managers] should be commended for the support they gave to me, which has enabled me to be the [healthcare professional] I am today.” Another staff member said, “Senior management are very caring and supportive, they try to recruit and retain [staff].”

We received positive feedback from staff regarding opportunities for further learning and opportunities which allowed for good succession planning and talent management. We saw staff approached managers with ease, and managers demonstrated to us how staff feedback and communication is acted upon and reviewed.

There were various ways the staff could engage with the management team. Each unit had a dedicated unit manager, and unit managers would meet regularly with the registered manager to ensure effective communication. The registered manager undertook regular visual reviews of the care home, and this included speaking with staff, both during and outside of office hours.

Senior management meetings took place with the provider, and records of these meetings evidenced good oversight and governance processes were in place.

Staff told us they were confident to approach managers and report any concerns to the ‘Freedom to speak up’ lead. Staff knew the importance of sharing information of concern and told us they felt any concerns they raised would be listened to and acted upon. The registered manager gave good insight into their knowledge, and actions taken to promote an open culture at the care home.

The provider had effective processes in place to support a speaking up culture at the care home. Staff were confident in the procedures in place and knew where to find specific guidance. The procedures included how concerns could be raised to external agencies if required.

We also spoke with the provider’s freedom to speak up champion who told us where information and contact details were available, and we observed this to be in place at the location. The freedom to speak up champion spent time at the care home to ensure staff could speak with them if they wished.

Staff told us they were confident in the registered manager, nominated individual and provider. Staff said they felt supported, and reasonable adjustments to accommodate any additional needs they had would be reviewed.

Staff told us they felt a diverse team worked at the care home, for example, 1 staff member said, “It is very multicultural, lots of backgrounds and cultures. It is very respectful.”

Processes were in place to ensure staff were treated fairly and equally, and their rights were upheld. An equality and diversity policy was in place, and staff spoke with confidence and knowledge of this.

We found the provider had many systems and processes in place to promote staff human rights, their well-being and ensure fair and equitable treatment of staff was provided.

We found the staff and management team provided a safe service, and we found it was well led. The registered manager was experienced and was aware of their regulatory requirements and responsibilities under the duty of candour. Duty of candour is a professional responsibility to be honest with people when things go wrong.

The registered manager and nominated individual were open and honest with us, throughout the assessment timeframe. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and we found action and reviews were completed promptly. Staff knew what to do and who to speak to if they required support or needed to raise concerns.

Governance systems at the care home were effective. The provider had an established staff team which provided support with human resources, data review, quality assessment and staff training. Whilst we found areas for improvement during the assessment timeframe, these had been acted upon, assessed for effectiveness and reviewed before the assessment had concluded. We found the registered manager reviewed systems and further monitored these to reduce the likelihood of future shortfalls.

Relatives told us the staff team worked well with them, and other professionals, to deliver safe and co-ordinated care to people.

Both the staff, and management team demonstrated to us how they worked collaboratively with health and social care professionals. This included participating in reviews and seeking information, guidance and support.

Partners told us they had regular interactions with the provider and staff. This included health care professionals and social care professionals.

There were processes in place to guide and promote collaborative and partnership working with other health and social care professionals. We observed specific communications which took place during the assessment timeframe, and the registered manager was eager to further improve communication systems where possible.

We found the registered manager and nominated individual were committed to sharing good practice and learning, this included to improve care experiences for the wider population, and to invest in the systems and processes used at the care home to improve outcomes for people.

Staff told us there was a learning and improvement culture at the care home. Staff demonstrated commitment to communication and innovation to improve outcomes for people. For example, the registered manager and nominated individual regularly reviewed current health and support research, they participated in relevant activities and adopted approaches within the service.

The provider had processes in place to learn from events and improve the service delivered where possible. Regular reviews of support provision and people’s experience took place. Staff participated in reviews and improvement plans to ensure their insight and thoughts were captured.

Effective governance processes insured learning and improvement reviews were ongoing, known and overseen by the provider.