Watford House Residential 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. The provider had created an exceptional learning culture at the service which continuously improved the care people received. There was a positive and open culture at the service and this reflected the provider’s aims strategy. The provider understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour. There were measures in place to help ensure any concern or shortfalls could be reported. The provider had a clear management structure that monitored the quality of care to drive improvements in service delivery. There was a registered manager at the service. Leaders at the service were capable and promoted compassionate and inclusive leadership styles. The provider worked in partnership with others to help improve services to people.

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’s values and aims had been shared within the service. These were discussed at staff meetings and the registered manager told us staff were encouraged to share how they had demonstrated them in their work. The registered manager told us they are working to empower staff to identity if there are times when the provider’s values could be better demonstrated. Staff all spoke positively about working for the provider and shared their values. Staff felt supported and received recognition for their contributions. Staff felt they were supported to develop and that the provider invested in them. Staff spoke about the homely atmosphere and wanting to ‘make a difference’ to people’s lives.

Staff roles and responsibilities had been clearly defined and responsibilities set out in relevant policies and processes. Meetings with staff provided opportunities for staff to discuss these. Any issues that had been raised were discussed with staff teams openly and in a way that helped things improve.

The registered manager was well supported by the provider. They felt the provider had invested in them and supported them to develop. They felt able to confide in and trust the provider. Systems were in place to celebrate staff success, including awards and conferences. All staff spoke extremely positively about the registered manager, and felt they showed good leaderships skills. Staff gave examples of the registered manager being compassionate, such as accommodating for child care emergencies. Staff felt able to approach the registered manager or senior leaders within the organisation with any concerns.

Systems and processes were in place to support positive relationships between managers and staff. For example, well-being meetings enabled open and honest discussions between the registered manager and staff where staff were able to raise any issue and receive help and assistance.

The registered manager demonstrated an understanding of the duty of candour and the importance of supporting staff and people to feel able to speak up. Staff demonstrated an understanding of ‘whistleblowing’. Staff felt able to approach senior care staff, the registered manager and regional management with any concerns and confirmed they felt they would be listened to. One member of staff shared they had made a suggestion to use the upstairs lounges as a quieter space for people and this had been implemented and had been successful.

Feedback processes, such as surveys and questionnaires, showed people had shared ideas and feedback and this had been listened to and used to improve the service. Opportunities to give feedback to the provider about any worries or concerns had also been provided. Staff had been advised on the provider’s ‘Whistleblowing’ policy and who they could speak to about any concerns.

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.

The registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities. Systems and processes were in place to oversee the service. This allowed the registered manager to see what the key risk areas were for the service. Findings and areas for improvement were shared with staff. Staff were aware of the audits and checks completed by the registered manager and confirmed any findings or areas for improvement were communicated with them. One staff said, “If we are dropping the ball it gets picked up on pretty quickly and we are aware what needs to be improved.”

Visits and audit processes by the provider were thorough and detailed. They identified opportunities for continuous learning and improvement. They proactively identified risk and set actions to help mitigate this. Governance arrangements showed good oversight of the quality and safety of services. Action plans were monitored to ensure satisfactory progress towards improvements had been made. Policies were in place to provide clear guidance on areas of care such as falls, with links to national good practice. Other policies for the safe running of the service, such as the safe recruitment of staff were in place. Policies supported people’s human rights, freedoms, choices and positive risk taking.

The registered manager felt the service had a very positive working relationship with a range of different professionals. This helped people to achieve good outcomes. They explained they are working with the local community, including visits from nurseries. Staff were able to demonstrate how they work in partnership with a range of different professionals to support people to achieve good outcomes.

People confirmed that the service liaised with relevant professionals, such as the GP, in relation to their care and support needs. Relatives we spoke with were satisfied that their family members received the healthcare they needed.

Effective partnership working was in place to support people to access appropriate healthcare. The local GP and Advanced Nurse Practitioner made regular visits to see people living at Watford House residential Home. The registered manager operated effective systems to ensure any changes in people’s healthcare needs were communicated to the relevant healthcare professionals when needed. Referrals to other healthcare services were made appropriately. Partnership working helped to ensure people remained connected to their local communities and involved in a range of meaningful activities.

We received feedback from the local authority commissioning team and Healthwatch Derbyshire, who are an independent organisation that represents people using health and social care services. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services which are paid for by the local authority or by a health clinical commissioning group. The local authority shared their latest visit report with us to help inform our assessment planning. They told us the registered manager had been working to improve the detail involved in people’s care plans. We found this was in progress during our assessment. Healthwatch Derbyshire told us they had previously received a comment regarding staffing. We found no concerns with staffing during our assessment.

Leaders were committed to continuous learning and trying new ideas to improve outcomes for people. Learning was effectively shared with staff through different meetings and systems. Improvements had been made since our last inspection and leaders maintained a comprehensive oversight of current actions to further improve the service.

The provider had a clearly set out strategy to monitor the quality and safety of services and to identify improvements. The provider’s actions had led to improvements in the quality and safety of services and improved outcomes for people as well as ensuring the service operated safely and the premises safety maintained. We saw where people were given choices and control in changes and people felt listened to and empowered and experienced improved life experiences and outcomes. Partnership working with other professionals was utilised well to help achieve good care outcomes for people and their families. Innovation was demonstrated through the variety of meaningful and engaging activities involving people and connecting them to their local and wider community. The provider used recognised processes to help make improvements, carry out changes successfully and continuously improve. They took opportunities to learn how to improve the service and help reduce risks to people when things had gone wrong as well as when things had worked well. This helped to promote a safer environment and lead to better care and life experiences for people. Good practice was recognised and rewarded. Relevant training was provided, required competencies were checked and learning was embedded. Staff demonstrated a commitment to learning and improvement. This helped the provider to continuously aim towards improvements.