CWD Outreach Service

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 remained 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 82 (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.

There was a positive culture at the service. Leaders told us their key values included working together for consistent outcomes, collaborating with professionals, and accountability and development for staff. Staff worked in line with these values. Staff were made aware of company values by posters being displayed and by sharing through a team charter.

The provider had compassionate and 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.

At the time of the inspection, the registered manager was temporarily absent from the service. There was an acting team manager [manager] in post who was overseeing the service, alongside the nominated individual and director.

Leaders had completed additional training relevant to their role. For example, the manager was looking into starting a leadership qualification in health and social care. Senior leaders were qualified social workers. The manager received regular check-ins with senior leaders.

Staff spoke positively about the leadership team. Staff told us, “Our regular [registered] manager is really really good, knows the service well and is accessible and always happy to chat and provide advice and guidance”, “I feel that appropriate guidance and support are available when needed” and “I would say management is very caring and approachable. I know if I have any issues, I would be heard and taken seriously immediately.”

Relatives also spoke positively about the leadership team. Comments included, “[Manager] is excellent and an asset to the service.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Relatives felt able to raise any concerns. Comments from staff included, “I feel comfortable raising any questions, concerns or issues with management and feel that my views are listened to and taken seriously” and “If you have a problem the manager always returns emails or answers questions.” Leaders said they had an open-door policy and felt confident staff would feel able to speak up.

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. There were systems in place to support workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. Leaders had regard to protected characteristics and staff had access to a range of networks to support inclusion and wellbeing. Leaders shared examples of how they had considered reasonable adjustments to support staff and the provider had flexible working policies in place.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Leaders undertook a range of audits and quality checks to monitor the quality of the service. This included care file audits, supervision audits, and support worker audits. Leaders also told us they regularly reviewed children’s person-centred plans and risk assessments and any outstanding actions. Staff thought the service was well managed.

The provider clearly understood and carried out their duty to collaborate and worked in partnership, and services worked seamlessly for people. They always shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

There were many examples of how the provider had collaborated with other services to improve outcomes for people. For example, the service worked closely with educational settings, occupational therapists, the epilepsy team, crisis intervention teams and the manual handling teams. When devising children’s person-centred plans, the team worked closely with the child’s family to create this.

Leaders had undertaken joint presentations with other agencies in relation to the scope of their service. Leaders said they had also shared their paperwork with other services.

We were told of an example where one child chose not to leave the house, which impacted their quality of life. The provider worked effectively with other services, such as arranging a sensory assessment for the child, and now they able to regularly access the community, including going out and purchasing their own shopping. This meant the child’s quality of life had improved.

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.

Leaders shared learning across other organisations, as well as their own. For example, leaders shared learning with staff through supervisions and team meetings. The provider also held company wide events. One leader commented, “These are learning events, they give you a wider framework. There is a real emphasis on learning and development.”