Stone Gables 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 inadequate. 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 governance.

This service scored 61 (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 registered manager said, “Nobody should be judged on anything. Every member of staff must be treated equally.” The provider was working towards improvements within the home and staff told us changes had begun. The provider was open to our feedback and wanted the home to provide “positive and person-centred care.” Staff meetings had started to take place to ensure staff were encouraged to contribute to changes within the home.

Not all leaders understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. They did not always embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders did not always have the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. Although the provider had completed recent audits, actions from these audits had not been completed and we continued to find issues during our assessment. Some people and their relatives told us they did not know who the management team were however 1 person said, “Yes, we have met the managers, they know their stuff, they will do for me.” Staff told us they had seen some improvements since the new manager started which included, regular meetings and supervisions.

People did not always feel they could speak up and that their voice would be heard. For example, there was no formal freedom to speak up guardian and staff were expected to raise concerns with the manager. However, 1 staff member told us this could be difficult especially if they had concerns about the management team and if they did not respond to issues raised. Another staff member, “Yes I am able to raise concerns, but we are not always listened to.” The manager told us, “I have an open-door policy, staff know that it is confidential whatever they say. Staff can call at any time.”

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 valued diversity in their workforce. There was an open and inclusive recruitment procedure, and the staff team consisted of people from various backgrounds and cultures.

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

At this assessment we found the provider had made some improvements however, further work was needed to ensure the service consistently provided good care. For example, audits were carried out, but there was no established process to follow up on issues identified, as the system was still in the early stages. Whilst the new management team had developed governance systems, these had not yet been fully embedded or proven effective.The provider had drafted an action plan and was working closely with the new manager to address issues raised.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners. During our assessment we saw district nurses visiting and liaising with staff about people’s care. The home was also working alongside the local authority and had regular meetings with them to ensure actions were being taken.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They did not always actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research. Although some progress had been made since the last assessment, not all previously identified issues had been addressed. This demonstrated a poor culture of learning and not enough action to achieve and maintain long-term improvements.