• Care Home
  • Care home

St Lukes Care Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Palacefields Avenue, Palacefields, Runcorn, Cheshire, WA7 2SU (01928) 791552

Provided and run by:
Halton Borough Council

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Report from 18 December 2024 assessment

On this page

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 20 December 2024

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 inspection this key question was rated requires improvement. At this assessment this key question remains at requires improvement. We identified improvements were needed in oversight of training for staff and the recording and assessments for restriction put in place for people in the home. The management team was responsive to our feedback and told us they were committed to improve the safety and quality of care being delivered and had started making improvements during the assessment. The provider’s oversight and governance failed to ensure systems and processes identified the improvements needed in the quality and safety of care being provided. This was a breach of Good Governance.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 3

Most staff told us they enjoyed working at St Lukes. One staff member said, “My favourite thing is finding out all about the residents, what they have done and achieved, and it is a privilege to have the opportunity to work with and support amazing people.”

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.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 3

Staff felt there had been improvements in management, and the manager was providing support and giving a clear direction for improvement. Staff morale and culture of the service was good. Staff told us, “You never feel on your own with anything” ,“The manager is always around and will often work later. I have always felt very supported” and “The manager is always supportive and makes themselves available when any of us need it.”

We saw staff had clear pathways to speak up and felt valued and part of the service, feedback from staff confirmed this. The provider had inclusive leaders 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.

Freedom to speak up

Score: 2

Most staff told us they felt able to raise concerns to leaders and we saw discussions during team meetings. One staff member said, “Team meetings are regular and staff supervisions where you can chat about any concerns, I find they can be useful and I am willing to raise any issues” and “I find team meetings very helpful, Team meeting is always after our handover.” However, one staff member told us when they reported issues they were not dealt with.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff had access to regular supervision and support from leaders, promoting staff empowerment and involvement in the service. The majority of staff we spoke with felt able to raise concerns to leaders and we saw discussions during team meetings.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 2

Most staff felt supported at the service and told us they felt it was a very good place to work. Staff said, “[Name] is always approachable and incredibly supportive” and “Managers office door is open. The manager comes on to the unit speaks to staff. I have manager’s email. Manager is friendly, fair and firm.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They were working towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. However, we found staff had not been supported to complete key training areas as discussed in this assessment.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 2

Staff feedback was overall positive for the improvements in the service, they felt they knew their roles and responsibilities and were able to approach the new manager for advice and support. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and supported, they felt confident in finding the information they required and using the systems to support their roles. Staff told us, “We have a suggestion box for ideas, and we get feedback from manager” and “I have raised things about residents such as someone may need a referral for SALT.” Although staff feedback was positive the provider had failed to support staff to have up to date training in key areas.

The provider did not always have clear systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always assess or record information about restrictions placed on people at St Lukes. The provider did not have a policy in place for this restriction. Following the feedback of this the provider told us they were developing a policy and procedure. Audits were completed by leaders but failed to identify gaps we found during our assessment. For example, shortfalls in key training for staff had not been identified and during the assessment.

Partnerships and communities

Score: 3

There was good leadership at the service. Family members told us the manager was committed and approachable when needed. Comments included, “The manager is very friendly and approachable, would action any concerns, we have meetings time to time, notices are put up, I think they are helpful, staff take on any concerns” and “Manager is approachable and friendly, she would be pro-active with information and action I feel.”

The provider engaged in working with other organisations to support people using the service. This included partnership working with health and social care professionals such as GPs and Local Authorities.

Partner agencies told us they worked well with the manager and staff team at St Lukes. Comments included, “If the patient's wound presentation has changed or deteriorated the home staff are aware to contact the TVN team anytime if TVN input is required” and “Regular staff are kind, caring and very loving. They off exceptional care.”

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.

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 2

The manager understood the needs of people living at the home, including their individual circumstances. However, as highlighted in this assessment the provider did not always assess or record information about restrictions placed on people and staff had not had their training monitored effectively at St Lukes. The provider did not have a policy in place for this restriction.

The provider did not always focus on continuous improvement in some area of the organisation. The provider had not ensured staff were trained in important areas and any potential restrictions had not been assessed and recorded appropriately. Whilst we did identify shortfalls during this assessment, the provider was responsive to our findings and acted immediately on key areas of improvement.