Cranbourne House

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 management team and staff demonstrated a commitment to person-centred care and improving outcomes for people. Staff described a supportive and open culture, and our conversations confirmed the home’s values were at the heart of their role. Staff were involved in regular team meetings, and the values of the home were regularly discussed. We were assured the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

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 the skills and commitment to support the home. There was a focus on genuine, positive outcomes for people, the development of staff and the quality of the service. The registered manager was approachable, visible and spoke passionately about the home’s journey of improvement. We received very positive feedback about the registered manager’s approach and mentorship. Comments from staff included, “[Registered manager] listens to what people want and how to improve” and “[Registered manager] is supportive. The home looks much better, and it is a nice atmosphere to be in.” The registered manager felt well supported by the provider and the wider quality and safety team who supported the home.

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

The provider had a whistleblowing policy in place, which included clear guidance to support staff to ‘speak up’. Staff understood the processes to follow, should they have any concerns. The provider also held ‘Your say’ forums for staff, which were arranged in a relaxed, social venue and had also recently introduced a process where staff could speak directly with the chief executive if they wished. Leaders ensured people knew and were able to exercise their rights.

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 employed a diverse staff team. Human resource policies were in place to ensure staff understood their rights as an employee. The provider valued diversity in their workforce and worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. All staff completed training in equality and diversity.

The recruitment process was fair and inclusive, with health questionnaires completed to ensure the provider was aware of any reasonable adjustments required to support staff.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and improving governance arrangements. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support.

There was a clearly defined governance structure which included audits and checks at multiple levels. The provider had policies in place, which were regularly reviewed.

A range of quality assurance systems were in place to monitor and improve the service. These had been effective in identifying areas for development. Any findings were transferred to an overarching service improvement plan, which was regularly reviewed. The registered manager and staff understood the roles the provider’s senior managers and specialists played in monitoring quality and safety. Checks included out of hour unannounced visits by the registered manager.

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 registered manager demonstrated they valued and welcomed partnership working. Leaders had worked with people, their representatives and staff to build a culture that focused on enabling people to enjoy their lives. The registered manager was part of the local registered manager’s forum and valued the support this provided.

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.

There was a culture of learning and improvement. Staff expressed a pride in working for the service and in the care and support they provided. Comments included, “Development never stops.” Examples of planned improvements included developing the garden space at the home through collaboration with people and further strengthening the electronic systems used by the provider to enhance the monitoring of quality and safety. The model of care was in line with current best practice guidance right support, right care, right culture. Leaders worked with people, their representatives and staff to build a culture that focused on enabling people to enjoy a full life.