DCA Alderwood

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 saw evidence in improvements in the governance of the service since the new manager had started. There was a shared culture and ethos in the service and staff told us they felt supported and able to speak up if needed.

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.

Staff told us there were shared values across the service. They felt supported in their roles within a positive culture.

Senior leaders met regularly. Lessons learnt were shared across the organisation. For example, changes had been introduced following an inspection at one of the provider’s other locations. Certain support plans had been withdrawn and guidance was given around restrictive practices. All staff were encouraged to support people to have meaningful and fulfilled lives.

Staff told us the manager was knowledgeable and keen for people to progress within the service. They told us they had seen positive changes with the new manager in post.

In response to the manager’s request for more support a new management structure was being put in place and staff recruited to new management/supervisory roles. Staff were encouraged to develop their skills and progress. The manager was new in post and there was evidence of improvements to the service in progress.

Staff told us they had opportunities to share concerns and good practice in team meetings and supervision. They felt listened to by the management team.

There was a whistleblower policy in place and staff were actively encouraged to give their feedback through staff surveys and supervisions, although these were not always being completed regularly. Staff meetings were in place. People using the service had regular reviews, meetings and access to a complaints procedure.

Staff told us that they felt treated fairly by the management team and were comfortable speaking to them.

We saw evidence in the recruitment program that staff’s individual needs were considered. Information was translated for staff whose primary language was not English.

Staff did not have any specific feedback in this area.

There was a system of monthly audits in place including care records, environment, fire safety, food safety, transport and water checks. There was an improvement plan and fire risk assessment action plan in place. The provider’s quality team regularly visited. Lessons from other locations run by the provider were being shared across the organisation.

There was no specific feedback in this area.

Staff shared no specific feedback in this area

Partners did not share any specific feedback in this area.

We saw examples of partnership working such as a referral to the community team for people with learning disabilities to assist with anxiety and behaviour management triggered by one person’s past trauma. We saw evidence of consultation with assistive technology experts to support people.

Staff had no specific feedback in this area.

There were regular staff meetings and a staff supervision program in place, however these were not always completed in a timely manner. Lessons learnt were shared through meetings, news bulletins and supervisions. There was an improvement plan in place to embed learning from an inspection at another location run by the provider.