Park View

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 service 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 and leadersdemonstrateda positive, compassionate, listening culture that promotedtrust and understanding between them and people using the service. 

For example, leaders and staff helpedpeopleto increase theirindependenceand live full, active lives.People were supported to make their own daily choices. The team worked closely together.Feedback showed people felt in control and happy with their support.

People and families took part in regular meetings about their support.These meetings helped people stay involved in planning and decision-making. Feedback showed open, honest communication. Concerns were handled quickly,and ideas were shared.

The service 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 leadership team were experienced and skilled, they worked well together and shared their knowledge and skills with each other and with the team and staff were supported to progress their careers. This had enabled them to improve people’s quality of life.The manager advocated for people to ensure their needs were appropriately met, for example, where there were delays making clinical decisions, the manager escalated this to the local member of parliament, people’s quality of life improved as a result. Staff provided positive feedback, for example a staff member said, “I feel very supported, [registered manager] is the best manager I have ever had. [registered manager] has made changes and improved the service”.

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

The provider supported people to complete safeguarding training at the head office, which covered abuse, neglect, human rights, hate crime and mate crime. People said they knew if something was not right or they felt unsafe and felt able to speak up.

When staff raised concerns, these were investigated, and actions were taken to maintain people’s safety and wellbeing. After any investigation, feedback was provided and lessons learnt were shared.

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 felt supported, reasonable adjustments were made to support staff to carry out their roles well. Staff had access to an employee assist programme and occupational health.

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.

The service regularly completed robust quality assurance audits and effective action plans were in place, monitored and continuously updated. The registered manager understood their responsibilities and was aware of the need to notify the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of any significant events in line with the regulations.

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.

External professionals we spoke with confirmed staff and the management team were knowledgeable and responsive to people’s needs and wishes. Relationships with external professionals such as colleges, physio therapists and social workers were effective and supported continuity of care. The service was viewed as reliable, professional and transparent. A professional told us, “The home maintains positive working relationships, demonstrating openness, collaboration and mutual respect”.

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 provider engaged people, their families, professionals and staff in the running of the service and invited feedback through informal chats, regular meetings and specific focus groups. Staff were also encouraged to regularly feedback via an online portal about the service delivery and share ideas and suggestions on how the service could be improved. Anonymous quality assurance questionnaires were sent to people, their families ,staff and professionals once a year, and we saw the provider used this feedback to make improvements.