Gatwick Rise

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 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.

One care worker told us, “Things have improved so much since the new manager started. We have more staff and less chaos, a lot more activities so people we support are engaged and interested.” Staff felt confident to raise issues and that they would be listened to. One told us, “The manager sent me a personal thank you the other day, I couldn’t believe it. She said I handled a situation well. I’ve never had anything like that from a manager before, it makes all the difference.” The manager acknowledged there was a lot to do to improve the service but was proud of what they had achieved in a short time. The manager told us, “I think we empower people to have control over their own lives and have support. It's important to work with families and have close working relationships with health professionals. We work to build a better life. We try to make things fun. Gatwick Rise is a fun place to be. I think we support some great people. The staff team we have separates us from others... from other similar care homes. We really, really care. Our staff have been here for 14 years!”

We saw emails which the manager had sent out to families introducing new team members, and themselves as the new manager. The service had an electronic system in place to allow relatives access to their loved one’s daily care records, for transparency and accountability.

Staff told us they felt well supported in their roles by the manager. A staff member told us. “It’s a lovely place to work now. Even [the manager] has jumped in to do personal care, I’ve never seen that before.”

The provider was supporting the new manager to register with CQC. We observed a weekly managers’ meeting. The managers spoke compassionately and sensitively about the people they supported, highlighting their strengths and areas in which they needed more support. They were similarly compassionate towards the staff they discussed.

Staff understood the whistle blowing policy and the manager told us they were happy to hear from staff about any concerns they had. There was no evidence of a closed culture.

The provider used staff surveys to gain feedback from staff. Staff could also raise any concerns or complaints through the provider’s electronic devices, a suggestion box and an email address they could send anonymous emails to. We saw the provider’s whistleblowing policy. The policy reminded staff the service was committed to the highest standard of openness, integrity and accountability and to the continuous improvement in the way they supported people and their family, and staff.

Staff told us and we observed managers employed and supported staff from a diverse background.

Systems were in place to ensure staff worked in an inclusive environment. Training, supervision and appraisals as well as team meetings were taking place. The provider had an equality, inclusion and diversity policy in place which promoted staff’s protected equality characteristics.

There was a management structure in place, and we observed leadership and accountability in the day to day running of the service. Leaders showed an understanding of risks to people and were taking responsibility for the oversight of these areas. All the leaders had specific roles and responsibilities such as a medicines lead, liaison between team leaders and manager. Leaders were also supported with completing supervisions with staff.

Effective quality assurance systems were being used to ensure oversight of the running of the service and management of people’s care and risks. For example, the manager conducted daily walk-rounds of the service which were documented on the provider’s electronic system. The electronic system had prompts for capturing people’s voices and evidencing person-centred care.

Staff supported people to be part of their local communities in different ways, for example some people could freely access local community facilities while others needed more structured support to ensure they were not overwhelmed.

The manager told us they worked with various professionals such as Community Learning Disability Team (CLDT), social workers and others to ensure continuous and supportive care for people. However, during our assessment we found examples where this was not working in an effective way, for example we found communication was not always shared with professionals in a timely manner.

Some health care professionals told us they had received appropriate referrals for people and had a good working relationship with the service; however, this had been strained in recent months before the new manager was appointed. Good communication between the service and professionals had not always been sustained, for example we received feedback from a health professional who informed us they had not been informed of a change to a person’s physical health. The lack of information sharing had a detrimental effect on the person’s plan of care and support with physical therapy.

Records showed the provider worked closely with local health services and the CLDT to ensure people could access these safely. For example, we saw evidence the provider was getting appropriate external support for the dentist desensitisation program, which was in line with the Government's guidance on ‘Oral care and people with Learning Disabilities.’

The provider acted on our feedback and recommendations which demonstrated knowledge, insight and a desire to improve the service. The manager told us “Staff are encouraged to make suggestions on how to make improvements. Feedback is the key to continuous improvement.”

The provider had plans in place to introduce new systems and processes to help staff members, for example, they were planning to introduce a new system which supported gathering feedback from people who did not communicate verbally about their pain levels. There were plans also for introduction of a national membership card scheme which aimed to reduce barriers for people who use wheelchairs or have other mobility needs when accessing venues in the community