Salutem Supported Living North

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 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 clear values based on creating meaningful and fulfilled lives for people. Leaders sought to embed these values in people’s experiences.

The values of the organisation were understood by staff who worked with people to promote their inclusion and engagement.

Relatives in the main were happy with the values and aims of the service and felt glad their relations were living there.

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.

The registered manager was a good role model and embodied the values of the organisation.

Feedback from staff was positive who said they felt valued and supported at work by the registered manager. Relatives told us they felt confident about the skills and knowledge of the registered manager.

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

People were supported to speak up and voice their views. The provider valued people’s views and endeavoured to respond to requests where possible. Some people had advocates and representatives to support them.

Staff and relatives told us they felt able to raise any concerns with leaders and felt confident they would be respected and responded to. However, several relatives identified a need for improved communication, we raised this with leaders who had responded to this during this assessment.

Staff had received training and understood the provider’s whistleblowing policy.

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 developed ‘Culture Champions’ who considered the culture of the organisation as a whole and sought to promote inclusion and diversity.

Staff felt respected and included at work. Staffs’ equality and diversity needs were considered throughout the recruitment process and regularly addressed through supervision and support meetings.

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 a framework in place which supported leaders to maintain good oversight of the quality of all aspects of the service. Regular audits by regional managers were completed and improvement and development plans were developed to ensure compliance.

Records we reviewed showed regular audits had taken place in relation to health and safety, infection control and medicines and the premises. These had not identified concerns raised by relatives including poor food hygiene practices and concerns about medicine stocks. We sought assurances about this from the provider who accepted there had been some inconsistencies but said these had been addressed.

Some relatives were concerned about the level of senior and management oversight in the two 7 bed tenancies. They felt the concerns they had would not happen if there was more direct supervision. We raised this with the provider who advised there were seniors in post and felt management presence was not always necessary within supported living services.

Staff understood their roles and what leaders expected of them. Rotas clearly identified who staff were supporting and what support they needed.

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 provider and registered manager worked in partnership with other services this had included accepting support and guidance from health professionals around medicine management.

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.

The provider encouraged continuous professional development and learning. Leaders and staff were able to attend conferences within the organisation.

The Autism Practice group was a shared forum for managers to share experience and look at best practice.

The provider continued to look at the innovative use of technology to enhance peoples’ experiences.