Whell Care

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to the governance of the service, ensuring records were person-centred and managing risk.

This service scored 62 (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.

Staff and people felt there was a positive culture at the service. Communication channels between people, staff and management were open and effective. The staff and the registered manager put people first and described them as ‘family’.

Not all leaders understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. However, they did embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders did not always have the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively.

The registered manager has not always kept themselves up to date on current guidance in relation to risk management and person-centred record keeping.

Staff said the registered manager was approachable and supportive. One staff member said, “Support from [the registered manager] is good,” and confirmed there was management cover available if the registered manager was away from work.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.
All staff we spoke to felt it was easy to raise issues. They described the registered manager and senior carers as approachable. A staff member said, “I am very confident that I can discuss any issues with [the registered manager] and that they would take my feedback onboard or investigate my concerns if needed.”

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.

We asked staff whether they had ever experienced discrimination, and no one raised concerns with us. Staff were provided support through relevant training and supervision to inform their knowledge and understanding of equality, inclusivity and fairness in the workplace.

The provider did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They did not act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

There were limited governance processes in place. We found issues with recruitment, risk assessments, and care records during the assessment. The provider’s governance systems had not identified the issues we found. However, we found no evidence that these issues had impacted the people receiving care. Following the inspection, the registered manager submitted further evidence to show actions had been taken to rectify the issues we found including improved risk assessments and care plans.
 

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.

Records showed appropriate partners were involved in people’s care when needed. When asked whether staff collaborate well with them, all health and social care partners said staff were receptive to their guidance.

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 registered manager spoke about how they continued to make improvements to the service. They were receptive to the areas of potential improvement we raised during the assessment and addressed these immediately.