Dolphin View 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. The service was no longer in breach of legal regulation 17 for governance. 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 71 (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, people and families felt there was a positive culture at the service. Communication channels between people and families, staff and management were open and effective. The manager was proud of how the staff team promoted the service’s values and how collaboratively they all worked together.

A staff member said, “[The manager] is brilliant. I can go to her with anything. She’s approachable and respects us all. She tells us where we could improve things to make it better for the residents and also lets us know when we do a good job.”

Professionals told us they had good working relationships with the manager and the home. A relative said, “The new manager has certainly renewed my confidence, and the staff are all happier than I have seen them in a long while.”

The provider had leaders at all levels who were aware of the environment they worked in and delivered care, treatment and support while reflecting the values and culture of their team and organisation.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The manager had good oversight of the service along with the senior leadership team which consisted of operational managers, regional managers, quality assurance managers and the nominated individual. The manager told us they felt supported by their senior managers especially with being a new manager, awaiting their registration, with CQC. Following our visit the manager has been successful in registering with CQC and is now the registered manager.

Staff told us that the management team were supportive and listened. When asked whether the manager was fair and approachable, all the staff we spoke with answered positively.A staff member said, “[The manager] is regularly on the floor, seeing residents, she knows everyone and manages with a personal touch. She is approachable and I could go to her with any problem. We have a great team mix.”

A relative said, “I have met the new manager, and she comes across as very nice. In fact, she sought me out as we had been missing each other. I was impressed. She’s a do-er.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up, and their voice would be heard.

Whistleblowing policies and complaints procedures were in place and provided staff with guidance in line with best practice on speaking up. Guidance was displayed around the home, for quick reference. All staff knew what to do and whom to speak to should they feel they needed to speak up. Staff told us they would do so if required.

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.

All staff that we spoke with told us that discrimination was not a problem and that the manager was fair and open so if there were any issues they felt confident they would be resolved.

At times, the provider’s responsibilities, roles, and systems for accountability and governance were not always fully defined. Occasionally, they did not make use of the most up-to-date information about risk, performance, and outcomes, or share this information appropriately and or in detail when needed. There was however no impact on people's care, which was safe and effective.

Systems for checking and improving the service were in place. Although the manager, senior team, and quality team all reviewed audits to keep things fair, some records lacked detail. Safeguarding arrangements were in place, and concerns were reported to the local authority and CQC as required. We saw the details in safeguarding, notifications, and incident reports were brief, although the information included was relevant. The manager acknowledged the feedback and told us that steps had been implemented to improve these processes.

The provider acknowledged, during discussions, that albeit the introduction of activity coordinator roles has been received positively it was too soon to quantify the impact on people living at the home.

Staff told us they felt the service was now well led and had clear and effective communication from leadership across the organisation. Staff felt that improvement had taken place since the current manager had taken up their post. All staff spoke positively both about management and the service.

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.

Partner agencies told us that the home staff team and manager worked well alongside them, listening to and implementing advice given to best support people.

A healthcare professional said, “All information is handled with confidentiality and prompt responses are given. We have a good working relationship.”

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.

The manager had implemented improvements in this area since the last inspection. At this inspection approaches were person-centred, and this was clear in all care records. Risk assessments previously not fit for purpose, were now detailed and documented in care planning. Improvements had been made to processes; training was in place and ongoing competency checks that ensured any concerns were managed. Best interest and deprivation of liberty safeguards meetings and documentation were recorded clearly. There was an open and positive culture amongst staff and the management team. Staff and families told us that morale was good. Staff told us they were enjoyed working for the service and manager and they loved their jobs.

Healthcare professionals had no current concerns about the service and one professional stated, “I don’t have any concerns about Dolphin View, the service they provide or the staff who are currently working there, I would say that Dolphin View is usually full or almost at capacity and this speaks volumes to the care they provide to their residents.”