Bings Hall

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

People, relatives and staff all spoke positively about the registered manager and how they were approachable and available to them. Positive feedback was received from all stakeholders in a recent satisfaction survey completed. However, although the registered manager completed checks and audits at the service, these were not robust. During our assessment of this key question, we found concerns around the quality assurance systems in place and the service and their failure to identify the concerns found during the assessment. This resulted in a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can find more details of our concerns in the evidence category findings below.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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 said they felt comfortable in raising concerns with the manager. One staff member said, “I can always talk, the manager is very supportive to me, and whatever she agrees she will see through. I feel listened to.”

There were systems in place to ensure staff were provided with opportunities to raise concerns. There was a current ‘whistleblower’ policy which detailed internal and external support for staff, should they need it.

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 gave mixed feedback about their involvement in oversight of quality, but were clear on their roles and responsibilities and that of others in the team. Staff also had differing view on their attendance to team meetings. However, all confirmed they felt they could approach the manager at any time.

The registered manager completed audits and checks at the service with a view to assessing the quality of the care provided. However, we found that these were ineffective and had failed to identify the concerns we found during the assessment. The provider spoke about the requirement to develop their governance systems. The registered manager acknowledged their auditing did not set out clear actions and goals to drive improvement in the service and this was something they were going to develop. An annual satisfaction survey had been completed in December 2023 involving people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. We saw that positive feedback was received from all stakeholders.

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.