St Peters Court

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 remained 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.

This service scored 57 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and relatives were complimentary of the staff team and management. One person told us, “I do like living here, I try to help where I can.” Comments from relatives included, “The staff appear to me to work as a team together well. Everyone seems happy and always say hello and greet me when I visit.”

Staff spoke positively about the people they cared for. Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team. Staff confirmed they had regular supervisions and could request additional training if they required it. One staff member told us, “We are encouraged to request additional training whenever needed to improve our skills and knowledge.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels and though they had recently improved their quality assurance processes, there were still shortfalls in recording and reporting. Oversight for accident and incident reporting was not robust and leaders had not always recognised that some incidents required reporting and support from external professionals. The provider has since made improvements in their oversight around reporting. We have not been able to assess the impact and sustainability of these changes during this assessment.

The registered manager and wider management team supporting during the assessment were responsive and recognised that improvements were needed and responded positively to feedback given.

Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team and people and their relatives told us they found management approachable and able to raise any concerns. Comments included, “Management are very approachable” and “I feel confident in the support and guidance provided by management.”

There were systems in place to support people and their relatives to feedback on their experiences of the home. This included reviews, meetings, surveys, and the complaints process. However, it was not always clear what actions were being taken with regards to feedback that was received. The provider has since implemented a ‘You Said, We Did’ form to enhance their processes for obtaining feedback. We have not been able to assess the impact or sustainability of these changes during this assessment.

The provider had policies and procedures in place that supported staff with speaking up such as a safeguarding and whistleblowing policy. The provider had recently implemented a staff suggestions/concerns box as a recommendation from recent input at the service from the Local Authority. Staff were having regular supervisions and were encouraged to attend regular meetings.

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. Staff told us they felt they were treated fairly at work.

The provider had a policy in place for equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff had completed training in equality and diversity. Staff told us they felt that any concerns they raised would be acted on. Comments included, “They [management] also listen to any concerns or suggestions and take them seriously, which makes the workplace feel safe and positive.” We observed a positive culture during our onsite inspection.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the home. We saw evidence of regular audits being completed; however, we could not always be assured what actions were being taken with regards to issues identified within some areas of monitoring of the service. Accident and incidents were being recorded but not always effectively reviewed which meant appropriate referrals had not always been made to the appropriate health and social care professionals such as the Local Authority who investigate safeguarding referrals. It also was not clear what actions were being taken with regards to negative feedback received from people via resident surveys. The provider has strengthened their processes around governance of the service. We have not been able to assess the impact or sustainability of these changes during this assessment.

Risk assessments and care plans for people were in place and reviewed regularly.

The provider had not always worked collaboratively and in partnership with some external services, though there has been recent improvements with this. Prior to our assessment we received information regarding the service from external professionals around a number of concerns around staff knowledge, 1:1 support and recording and reporting of incidents, which we also identified and have addressed with the provider. Information sharing with staff and others required improvement particularly around the accuracy of records.

We saw evidence of referrals being made when required to external stakeholders such as GP’s and the Dementia Intensive Support Service (DISS). This helped to promote positive outcomes for people using the service.

The provider had taken learning from their involvement with the Local Authority and have been making improvements to the service, though will need to embed this learning in order to make continuous and sustained improvements. The provider acknowledged that improvements were needed to make sure people always received high quality care and support. Feedback was welcomed from people, their relatives and staff.