78 Stubbington Lane

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. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to good governance. Improvements were found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Improvements had been made following our previous inspection. 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.

A professional told us, “From an external perspectivepositive steps have been made since the previous manager left, and new manager has taken over.”

A staff member told us, “The manager has good oversight of the work within the service. They are actively involved in day-to-day operations and make sure both staff and the people we support are good. They regularly monitor risk, medication practices, and daily notes to ensure we are running safely and effectively.

The manager also addresses issues promptly. The manager treats both staff and people with respect.”

We observed the manager to be supportive to both people and staff and was motivated to ensure the people living in the home were living their best lives.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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.

Improvements had been made following our previous inspection. The service 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 act on the best information about risk, performance, and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff and the management team understood the importance of reporting any changes to people’s wellbeing. They kept detailed records of the support people had received. Governance processes were effective in monitoring and improving the service. This included audits in relation to IPC, health and safety, and medicines.

There were security measures in place to ensure all paper and electronic information was stored safely and securely. The provider submitted information to partner agencies when required.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Improvements had been made following our previous inspection. The service focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local system. Staff and leaders were working to establish a consistent approach to improvement including monitoring progress and outcomes.

We reviewed evidence in team meetings, audits and quality assurance surveys which assured us learning was embedded, and the provider was continually striving to make improvements.

The provider had worked effectively to complete their action plan following their previous inspection. They had made the required improvements to meet the regulations and had maintained these improvements at the time of this inspection.

The provider was responsive during our inspection and the manager shared with us several ideas of how they wanted to improve people’s experience, these included introducing new activities both inside and outside of the home, which they had already begun to implement.