Orchard House Care Centre

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 assessed 1 quality statement within this key question. Processes did not always support high quality and inclusive care. We identified two breaches of regulation and other areas where care was not at a good standard. We found shortfalls in care records and gaps in recruitment records that had not been identified or addressed through the service’s audits. Leaders were not always alert to issues that may affect the quality of people's care. However, staff were confident about the leadership of the home. Where issues or concerns had been identified, action plans were developed to support appropriate improvements in a timely way. Leaders were open to continual learning and development, to achieve positive outcomes for people. The management team were responsive to the concerns raised during this assessment and demonstrated a willingness to address these issues.

This service scored 71 (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.

Leaders were not always alert to issues that may affect the quality of people's care. Leaders acknowledged some of the shortfalls we identified and agreed to review our concerns. However, staff were confident about the leadership of the home. A staff member said, "It’s a nice place to work, staff all get on well and I am able to approach the manager if I need to. Another staff member described the manager as fair and said, “I enjoy working at the home and would recommend it as a good place to work.” A third staff member told us, “I’m able to raise suggestions and am actively listened to by the manager. I would recommend as place to work and would be happy to have a relative here.” Through general discussion with the management team, it was evident they wanted to provide a good quality, person-centred and safe service to people. Where we raised concerns during this assessment they demonstrated a willingness to address the issues. The registered manager explained they had an open-door policy and fostered an inclusive culture to ensure staff or people/relatives could raise concerns or make suggestions.

Processes did not always support leaders to provide high quality and inclusive care. We identified two breaches of regulation relating to unsafe recruitment practices and a lack of clear records for staff on how to mitigate risks in people’s care. We found other areas where care was not at a good standard, relating to nail and dental care, choices and unequal opportunities for some people. Leaders appeared unaware of these issues and the mixed feedback we received from people regarding their care had not been identified by the service prior to our assessment. However, the management team gathered feedback from people, staff and visitors through quality assurance questionnaires and meetings. Where issues or concerns had been identified, action plans were developed to support appropriate improvements and monitor progress. Following our feedback, leaders were receptive to the areas of concern and provided updates on the actions they were taking.

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.

We did not look at Governance, management and sustainability during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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.