Wellfield Also known as Wellfield Pines and Wellfield Acorn

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

Since our last inspection, we noted that some improvements had been made, including for example, better liaison with external agencies and stakeholders in relation to notifiable incident reporting. Attempts had been made to streamline records and data management systems, with ongoing improvements in development. Action plans resulting from incidents were evident during our assessment.

A learning culture was developing at Wellfield, and there were processes in place to ensure learning for staff and changes to practice when incidents do occur. We saw opportunities for staff to debrief and reflect following incidents. We found no evidence of punitive or discriminatory language with regards to recent children resident at Wellfield, which contrasted with concerns identified on previous inspections.

However, leaders did not have sufficient governance systems and oversight of certain aspects of management responsibilities. We found unclear governance and accountability arrangements within the leadership and management team. Policies and procedures were not all in line with relevant frameworks, legislation and guidance.

A recently appointed manager was knowledgeable about issues and priorities for the quality of services, including plans to apply to become a registered children’s home. Although not embedded at the time of our assessment, there was a commitment from management staff and plans for high-quality leadership to be sustained through safe and effective recruitment and succession planning.

You can find more details of our concerns in the evidence category findings below.

We will be following up on our concerns and recommendations to ensure they have been put right by the provider.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff we spoke with had shared aims and goals for the children who had recently been in their care. Although leaders were in the process of re-designing the service, we did note that, during our assessment, the vision and strategy for the ongoing developments to the service were in the early stages and had not yet been developed through a structured planning process.

During our assessment, we found that staff and leaders are starting to develop a positive culture that promoted trust and understanding between them and children using the service and was focused on continued learning and improvement.

Recently appointed senior staff were knowledgeable about issues and priorities for the quality of services and could access appropriate support and development in their role. We saw an improvement in care planning and improved aspirations for documentation as a result of a recent management appointment.

Although not embedded at the time of our assessment, there was a commitment from management staff, and plans in place, for high-quality leadership to be sustained through safe and effective recruitment and succession planning.

Some staff and leaders actively promote staff empowerment to drive improvement. Most staff members feel they can raise concerns, however not all staff are confident that their voices will be heard or that appraisal processes are the appropriate forum for this.

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.

Management staff did not consistently understand their roles and responsibilities. Managers could not always account for the actions, behaviours and performance of staff, resulting in lack of oversight in relation to a specific incident and risk management. This linked to the identified breach of regulation 12 under the key question ‘Safe’.

Robust arrangements for records and data management systems were improved from previous inspections, but the provider continued to have unclear document storage solutions and a limited ability to retrieve documentation when required. However, we did see a commitment and plan to improve this with new systems due to be implemented by a recently employed manager at the home.

At the time of our assessment, notifications of incidents were found now found to be more consistently submitted to external organisations and stakeholders as required. This is an improvement from previous inspections and has resulted in improved working relationships with those partners and organisations.

However, there were unclear governance and accountability arrangements, which, at the time of our assessment were in the process of being reviewed. Leaders have not always communicated clearly regarding future planning on changes to key roles and the need for registration with other regulatory bodies .

We noted ongoing concerns in relation to the provider’s policies. Although many of them had been amended and updated prior to our assessment, we found that leaders did not consistently implement relevant or mandatory quality frameworks within these policies. This is especially in relation to the CCTV policy reflecting understanding of capacity and consent of children and young people under 18. Other policies were found to be insufficient, including the medicines policy with no reference to the safe management of PRN medication for example. We recommend as a priority that the providers policies are reviewed prior to new children being admitted to the home.

Staff and leaders work in partnership with key organisations to support care provision, service development and joined-up care. There has been a significant improvement with notification of incidents to relevant stakeholders. However, leaders were not sufficiently transparent when communicating with all relevant external stakeholders and agencies, for example with regards to applying to register with other regulatory bodies. We recommend as a priority that this is reviewed by the provider.

Concerns were raised on previous inspections relating to the holistic care of children at Wellfield, including their dietary needs being met appropriately. During our assessment, we found that leaders had been more responsive to understanding children’s nutritional needs, and we saw that staff did have an awareness of the importance of diet for children in their care.

All staff we received feedback from spoke positively about the care of a recent child resident, with shared aims, care, compassion, and aspirations for them. We found no evidence of negative or punitive language being used in relation to children resident at Wellfield, which was an improvement from previous assessments.

We saw processes to ensure that learning happens when things go wrong. Leaders were seen to encourage reflection and collective problem-solving at team meetings and during staff appraisals. There was a clear strategy for how to develop these capabilities and staff are consistently encouraged to contribute to improvement initiatives, and management maintain oversight accordingly. Most staff felt this was a supportive process, although some others felt management appraisals were not optimised for more detailed reflection.