Nightingale Nursing and 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 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 75 (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. Staff told us, the new management team had improved the culture at the home, “The new managers who are supporting the home now have been effective.” The provider had visions and values in place which centred around excellent care provision. The nominated individual explained the values were promoted through weekly staff engagement. Staff told us about the values and how they helped promote team work at the home, they said, “I know the values, and display them to make sure people get the best care.” Another staff member we spoke with demonstrated the providers values around putting people first, they said, “I love working here, I love the residents, the staff. If the residents are happy, I am happy.”

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 provider had recognised a poor management culture and had acted quickly to rectify and improve the management of the home. An experienced manager and deputy from one of the provider’s other homes had been sourced to manage the home in the absence of a registered manager. Staff told us the new management team were supportive and caring towards both staff and people using the service. A new comprehensive induction programme had been introduced to ensure any other management changes would be supported and inducted safely. The provider’s senior leadership team were visible at the home. A member of staff said, “I have been very impressed with the director, they really do listen to what we’ve got to say.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff were aware of the whistleblowing policy. Policies in place supported staff to raise concerns both internally and externally. The provider implemented weekly visits from their human resources team following concerns being raised, these visits provided staff with an opportunity to raise concerns in a confidential environment. Regular meetings were held and recorded to allow for staff not able to attend to review the content. Actions of meetings were documented to ensure any action needed was completed. Staff surveys were completed and the results shared to see what was working well and what was not. Staff told us they felt valued and supported in their roles.

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. Staff told us they were treated kindly and fairly; they were encouraged and supported in their roles. The provider had a clear development programme in place and recognised staffs’ strengths to enable them to progress in their chosen career. Staff completed Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion training. Staff had access to the service’s policies and systems.

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. Systems to audit the quality and safety of the service were in place and effective in identifying and addressing areas for improvement. The provider had acted following concerns being raised and conducted a full audit of the service to drive service improvement. An action plan was developed and reviewed weekly to track progress. The manager was aware of their regulatory requirements and responsibility under the duty of candour. Duty of candour is a professional responsibility to be honest with people when things go wrong.The management team and nominated individual were open and honest throughout the assessment process. The management team displayed a positive attitude to the assessment process and were responsive to our requests for information. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff felt supported by the management team and told us they would act on any concerns to protect people living at Nightingale.

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. The provider sought out feedback from external professionals to improve partnership working. Feedback we received demonstrated the service had worked effectively with external partners such as the local authority to improve the quality and safety of care. People and their relatives told us staff supported them to access services outside of the organisation such as the GP and chiropodist.

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. We found the provider was committed to quality improvement. A weekly update was sent to all staff detailing findings from audits. For example, a review of recruitment was shared with staff. This meant staff could see the provider had acted to make improvements. Sharing of meaningful information promoted service improvement.