Littlefair

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 improved 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 service was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to the oversight and governance of the service. Improvements were found at this assessment and the service 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.

The provider 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 described a positive culture at the service where people and staff were treated with respect and fairness. Staff spoke of improvements with the management of the service. One staff member said, “There is a very much more positive atmosphere now.” Another staff member said, “There had been a 100% improvement with the manager. Communication is a much better and so is staff morale.”

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. People, their relatives and staff were consistent in their positive views about the registered manager at the service. One person said, “If (Registered Manger) says it’s going to happen it does happen. This service is very well run.” Staff described the registered manager as being “hands on,” and said they were consistent in their approach, available and visible as a leader and provided support when needed.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Systems supported people, relatives and staff to provide feedback about the service. Staff told us they could speak up and were able to be open about their views both in team meetings or in individual supervision meetings. Staff were aware of the provider’s whistleblowing policy and said they would feel confident to use it. People and their relatives said views on the service were regularly sought and they knew how to complain if they needed to. One person said, “I would speak to any of the staff if I needed to, but I have never been unhappy here.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. The provider had developed a diverse staff team and staff said they felt included and involved in the service. One staff member said, “It’s a wonderful place to work, everyone supports each other.” Staff described being supported and having their diverse needs accommodated. For example, a quiet space was provided and time was allocated for staff to practice their religious needs.

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 act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate. Systems for oversight and governance had improved and there was no longer a breach of regulations. There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service and to identify where improvements were needed. When areas of improvements had been identified the registered manager had ensured changes were made to drive improvements. For example, systems for auditing medicines had improved and were embedded in practice. This meant any issues were identified and rectified quickly to ensure medicines were managed safely. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. One staff member described how staff worked together effectively and received clear guidance. They said, “We have a handover meeting, information is shared and then we know what is expected. We get updates from the team leader, so everyone is clear about what needs to be done.”

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement. Staff gave examples of how they worked effectively with partner agencies. One staff member described working with district nurses on a regular basis because some people needed regular injections. Another staff member told us how staff worked with the GP when a person’s health had deteriorated and they needed end of life care. Records showed staff were proactive in contacting partner agencies when people’s needs changed to ensure they received a seamless service. For example, advice was sought immediately for a person who showed signs of having swallowing difficulties and risks were managed whilst a SaLT referral was made. The provider had strong links within the local community and supported people’s participation in events with local schools, places of worship, a museum and music groups.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcomes and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research. The registered manager had oversight of systems for monitoring care and ensuring the safety of the service. They used information from audits, feedback from people, relatives and professionals and learning from incidents to inform a service improvement plan. This was regularly updated and supported the service to make continuous improvements. Staff described how their views were continuously sought about how to improve people’s quality of life. One staff member said, “She (Registered Manager) is always asking if there's anything they can improve on. She's always asking for opinions and suggestions.” A relative said, “There is a very personal approach here, I would say people have a good quality of life. The staff had a strong bond with people and it’s lovely to see.”