CGL Spectrum

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

Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles, had a good understanding of the services they managed, and were visible in the service and approachable for service users and staff. Teams had access to the information they needed to provide safe and effective care and used that information to good effect.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff were able to describe a series of meetings where information could be shared and escalated. These included daily, weekly and monthly meetings.

All staff had access to the right information to fulfil their roles. For example, the doctor had access to the prescription database. Managers had access to accurate information to support them with their management role, including information dashboards which showed the performance of the service, staffing and service user care. The service employed a lead data analyst to collect, analyse and disseminate data.

Leaders told us there were electronic systems in place that supported the service to understand and improve data such as mandatory training, supervision compliance and incidents.

Staff used an electronic recording system, which was easy to use. Recovery workers updated the system regularly including after appointments and interventions. All relevant staff had access to the system and had prompt access to care records that were accurate and up to date.

The service had clear governance processes in place to support good quality assurance and management oversight. Processes were in place to learn from any incidents and drive improvement. Systems were in place to ensure the correct partners were notified following incidents, accidents or safeguarding concerns. Systems were in place to support and develop staff. At the time of inspection, staff sickness was below 2%, mandatory training completion was above 95% and staff had access to regular supervision and appraisal.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Leaders told us that performance was monitored by completion of regular audits and the outcomes were recorded on key performance indicator dashboards. This meant leaders could monitor performance over a period of time to ensure continuous improvement.

Leaders we spoke with demonstrated a passion for learning and continuous improvement. The provider encouraged creativity and innovation to ensure up to date evidence-based practice was implemented and embedded.

There was a clear framework and agenda of what must be discussed in meetings to ensure that essential information, such as learning from incidents and complaints, were shared and discussed, along with examples of good practise.

Staff had implemented recommendations from reviews of deaths, incidents, complaints and safeguarding alerts at the service level.