OSJCT Townsend House

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

We assessed a limited number of quality statements in the well-led key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. There was a clear and effective management structure which aided the smooth running of the home. People and staff were positive about management of the home and told us the provider and the management team were supportive. Staff felt they were listened to and kept informed of improvement plans. The provider had oversight of the service and effective quality assurance systems in place that they used to monitor the quality and safety of the service. The provider’s systems allowed them to continuously learn and improve across the organisation. Action plans from governance processes were used to improve people’s outcomes both locally and further afield. The provider had a positive culture which encouraged people and staff to speak up. There were several channels that were used to obtain feedback which was in turn used to improve people’s outcomes and staff well-being.

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.

Staff told us the provider's vision and strategy were transparent and inclusive which allowed meaningful engagement with people. People and staff’s input were sought and used to make improvements in care. People, staff and relatives were seen as partners in care and this involvement resulted in better care and outcomes.

The provider’s policies and procedures were supportive of people and staff involvement. Records showed there was transparency regarding changes, people’s needs and care provision.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff told us they were supported to speak up and knew they would be listened to. Records showed staff attended meetings which included agenda items of updates on staffing and recruitment, feedback from people and relatives as well as any challenges the home was facing. Staff told us they knew how to whistle blow if needed but had not had the need to do so.

The provider’s policies and procedures encouraged people, staff and relatives to speak up through different channels and the feedback was used to improve care. People, staff and their relatives had opportunities to raise any comments via an open-door policy at any time. Communication was described as a two-way process which enabled better resolution of any issues raised. The provider had a whistleblowing policy which was available to staff.

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.

Staff told us there was a clear management structure. The home was led by an approachable and supportive new registered manager who was supported by a visible area operations manager and a knowledgeable deputy manager. Staff comments included, “Manager is hands on and get things done. Follows up things quickly and very supportive”, “Manager is the best manager ever. She is available and very supportive” and “Our management is open for any discussion, and they also check up on staff if they are any issues to be addressed. They give us first preference if there is any room for growth and promotions.” The provider was supportive and encouraged staff to progress. Staff told us they had embraced champion roles in all areas of care as this provided them with ownership opportunities for their work.

Whilst the provider's quality assurance systems continuously identified areas of improvement, these were not always followed through to ensure issues had been resolved. For example, the malodours in the home had been identified but not resolved. Audits also included all aspects of care including health and safety checks, safe management of medicines and people's care records. Shortfalls in medicines management resulted in reflective discussions with senior staff as well as competency checks. There was an emphasis on continuously improving the service and the provider had oversight of what was happening in the service.

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.

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