Crumble Cottage

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 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.

This service scored 62 (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. Leaders involved people, relatives and staff in the service so that everyone had the opportunity to comment and be involved in the development of the service. Staff meetings took place and gave staff an opportunity to share ideas and suggestions.

The provider had 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. The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager and team leaders. Staff we spoke with told us the management team were very approachable and supported them to carry out their role. Members of the management team were available out of hours to support staff and people.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff had access to the providers whistle blowing policy and felt their concerns would be listened to.

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. Policies and procedures were in place to ensure equality in the workplace. Staff felt supported by the management team and told us they were approachable.

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. Systems and processes in place to manage the service were not always effective. Audits had not identified the issues we found during our assessment, for example, risks in regard to window restrictors, radiator covers had not been considered and therefore no action taken to mitigate potential risks. Action was taken following our assessment, but systems and processes required updating and embedding in to practice to ensure they were effective.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. Staff told us how they worked in partnership with other professionals to ensure people were included in their communities and had access to relevant services.

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. Staff told us they felt valued and able to speak up and voice their ideas and suggestions. Staff felt listened to and appreciated. Visiting professionals told us staff and leaders were welcoming and open to their advice. However, systems in place to learn from incidents required strengthening, to ensure staff and leaders learnt how to improve the service and mitigate future risks.