The Old School House

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

We found that audits and processes were not always effective. During our assessment of this key question, we found concerns around provider audits, oversight and leadership of the service which resulted in a breach of Regulation 17 Good governance (1) (2) (a) (b) 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. The registered manager was committed to providing good care and support for people using the service. The provider was developing oversight to enable the service to improve opportunities for staff and people. However, this had not been completed and therefore not embedded into everyday practice.

This service scored 62 (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.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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.

The registered manager was committed to providing a good service for people. Staff were positive about the registered manager and felt supported in their roles. One staff member told us “[Registered Manager] has people’s best interests at heart in everything they do. They are approachable and I feel I can go to them at any time and make suggestions or discuss concerns.” The provider had identified the lack of oversight within the service and was working alongside the registered manager to develop improvements in leadership and culture within the service. However, this was not yet embedded in to practice.

The audits completed by the registered manager and provider were not fully effective in identifying improvements and developments for the service. Staff were focused on providing the individual care people needed but were not provided with opportunities to encourage reflective practice and explore innovation within an enabling culture. For example, some approaches were embedded in staff practice, but were not challenged to assess if these were the right approaches or needed to be changed. Care plans were regularly reviewed and evidenced staff were responsive to any changes in people’s needs. However, care plans lacked evidence of people’s involvement and contribution to developing their care, including goals and aspirations. The provider was in the process of improving their oversight of the service and had updated their quality assurance framework.

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.