Gainsborough 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 71 (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 developed a year-long strategy to, “celebrate best practices, enhance collaboration, and support continuous improvement”. This involved engaging services and staff in developing the provider’s culture and values, experiencing mentoring from peers, sharing ideas and improving community links. This was undertaken without increasing staff workloads and instead by working differently and by engaging with staff teams to ensure ownership of outcomes.

The informal short term aim of the service was to increase numbers of people using the service to enable it to become the homely service it had been before closure. As numbers increase, staffing would be increased accordingly, and they would soon recruit to positions such as activities staff who could assist with developing the atmosphere and injecting life into the home.

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 had supported the service through its temporary closure and had represented the service positively throughout. The registered manager was approachable and always open to staff, people and relatives seeing them as needed, and was often seen around the service supporting the team and chatting with people. The provider had been very supportive of the registered manager.
Staff were familiar with senior managers as they were frequently present at the service.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.
The provider completed an annual ‘You said, we did’ survey. 89 percent of staff across all respondents to the providers survey said they felt, “safe to be the authentic version of myself at work.” A staff member told us, “I feel I can raise concerns, my manager is very approachable, and my concerns often answered immediately.” They continued, “Morale is generally good. We support and respect each other. Yes, I do enjoy my job."

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 had compiled a monthly list of events and celebrations in different cultures and faiths that was used in the service to ensure an awareness and acceptance of all. The provider also recruited staff from overseas and when we inspected approximately half of the staff team were from overseas. Staff we spoke with told there was an inclusive culture, and no-one had been discriminated against.
Staff members completed ‘Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging’ training.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and 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 robust business continuity plan that had been used effectively when the service had to close due to a suspected but unfounded premises safety concern. All actions were taken as planned, and the registered manager and provider worked with other agencies to ensure a safe transition into other services for their residents.

Staff were clear about their roles within the service and told us they were well supported. There were systems to ensure information was shared with and received by staff. The registered manager began to share information with staff using their electronic system during our inspection. This meant information shared with staff was flagged if not read, and there was a clear audit if information had been received.
Quality assurance audits were in place, however these had not always been effective at identifying the areas for improvement found at this inspection.

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 had developed a community involvement plan to engage with the local community, to invite them into the service and to participate in community based events. Following the temporary closure there were mixed views of the service in the community. Some staff had experienced a negative response locally while the service was closed, and there was a strong determination to change views and to improve the services image and standing.

Actions included engaging with local schools for activities such as book reading and sharing experiences, working with faith groups to promote spiritual activities in the service and fundraising for charities and participating in charity events.

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 had systems in place to learn from adverse events. Information learned was shared with the teams at handover, during staff meeting and would also be added to the eCare system which would enable easier auditing of who had received the learning.
There was a wide range of training available to staff as part of their mandatory learning. Completion levels were high and staff, when allocated training, had 2 weeks to complete it to ensure it was done in a timely way.
The staff team told us the registered manager was approachable, and they would speak with them or team leaders if they had suggestions about people’s care and support.