Brindley Court

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

Staff were able to report concerns. While there were systems in place to promote a shared direction and culture, such as an open-door policy, one-to-one meetings, staff meetings and equality and diversity training, improvements were required to ensure staff worked well together and to promote a positive environment for people to live in. Systems in place to assess and manage the quality and safety of the service were not always effective. The provider had a whistleblowing policy which staff understood. The provider worked with health and social care partners to ensure people achieved positive outcomes and continued to work with partners to drive improvements at the service. Systems in place to promote learning, improvement and innovation were effective.

This service scored 57 (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 there was not always a shared direction and culture in the team. One staff member told us, “Historically there have been a lot of issues in the staff team and I am aware of ongoing arguments and complaints.” Another staff member told us, “The team is not perfect as there are a lot of staff from different backgrounds and there are clashes.” Another staff member told us, “There has been some conflict between staff. Some staff have said they don’t want to work with specific colleagues.” The registered manager told us, “There are lots of staff from different cultures and not everyone gets along. Since I started in the manager role, I have had to do lots of conflict resolution and work with human resources to manage grievances.”

While there were systems in place to promote a shared direction and culture, such as an open-door policy, one-to-one meetings, staff meetings and equality and diversity training, improvements were required to ensure staff worked well together and to promote a positive environment for people to live in.

Overall, staff felt the management team were compassionate and inclusive. One staff member told us, “The [registered] manager is very friendly to both staff and residents.” Another staff member told us, “Things have improved a lot with the new [registered] manager coming in. Staff used to know everybody’s business, but this is not the case with the new [registered] manager.” Another staff member told us, “I attend one-to-one meetings with the [registered] manager, and I can knock on their door anytime and they will listen.” Another staff member told us, “I definitely feel the management team are trying but they are being met with resistance. They try and encourage us to talk about things, but some staff take matters into their own hands and go above anyone and do what they want anyway.”

The provider had procedures in place such as one-to-one meetings and team meetings to ensure staff felt valued and could raise any issues affecting their work.

Staff understood whistleblowing procedures. One staff member told us, “The [registered] manager is visible, and staff tend to go to them and report concerns which they encourage. We discuss concerns at flash meetings. The [registered] manager goes around 2 or 3 times a day checking on things.” Another staff member told us, “When we report concerns to the [registered] manager, they are investigated.” Another staff member told us, “We can speak anonymously with the [registered] manager, and things are looked into officially.”

The provider had a whistleblowing policy which staff understood. Staff were able to report concerns in one-to-one meetings and the registered manager had an open-door policy.

Overall, staff told us the management team were supportive and inclusive. However, not all staff worked together well with each other and there were conflicts within the team.

While the provider had procedures in place to promote staff wellbeing and worked with staff to ensure they could perform at the best of their abilities, improvements were still required to ensure staff worked well together as a team.

While staff told us they recognised the importance of recording the care they carried out, we found improvements were required in the recording of people’s one-to-one and group activities, medicines, safety incidents and ensuring people’s care plans were up-to-date and accurate.

Systems in place to assess and manage the quality and safety of the service were not always effective. Reviews of care plans had not always identified where there was inaccurate, insufficient or out of date information about people’s needs. This meant the provider could not be assured people were supported correctly. Reviews of safety incidents had not always identified where there was a requirement to inform the relevant safeguarding authorities or where there was insufficient information recorded about safeguarding decisions or actions. This meant the provider could not be assured all actions had been taken to prevent further incidents. Medicines audits had not always identified issues with recording the positioning of transdermal patches or lack of information for the administration of as required medication. This meant the provider could not be assured they were reliably monitoring the safe application or efficacy of the medication. The provider had been working with staff responsible for administering medicines to ensure stock counts were recorded accurately on their medicines system. Although the provider had identified issues with the lack of interaction from staff to residents and with the provision of one-to-one and group activities, improvements were still required to ensure people’s care was person-centred and compassionate and people received dignity in their care experience. Audits and checks were carried out to ensure the building and care home environment were safe. For example, fire, gas, electrical and water safety checks were carried out in line with guidance and issues identified were resolved. Audits and checks carried out on equipment used to support people with their care were effective.

People told us the provider worked well with partner agencies in relation to their care.

Staff worked well with partner agencies, made referrals, and followed their recommendations when needed to meet people’s needs. The registered manager told us, “We have built up good relationships with social workers and commissioners. We've had meetings with commissioners regarding empty beds, referrals and funding. The GP practice visits to do their weekly ward rounds, and we make sure we get feedback from visiting health workers.”

Professionals supporting people living at Brindley Court told us the provider worked well with them to ensure people’s needs were met. One professional working with the service told us, “The home escalates appropriate appointments and referrals when required. The monitoring of patients appears appropriate, and any advice given by clinicians is always documented and actioned.”

The provider worked with health and social care partners to ensure people achieved positive outcomes and continued to work with partners to drive improvements at the service.

Staff told us they had a positive approach to learning and making improvements. The registered manager told us, “I have recently got involved in a provider forum with the local authority. As a provider we also hold monthly manager meetings and learning forums and try to learn from good work elsewhere in the organisation.”

Systems in place to promote learning, improvement and innovation were effective.