Meadowview Care Home

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

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 we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

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.

The service did not have a clear shared vision, strategy and culture which was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, and engagement. They did not always understand the challenges and the needs of people and their communities. The provider and service lacked clear and shared direction. Team meetings were held and used as opportunities to discuss any areas of concern but were infrequent. Further work was needed to empower the staff team to be involved in service development.

Leaders did not always have the skills, knowledge, and experience to lead effectively. The providers systems for oversight and quality monitoring were not being utilised effectively to address and remedy shortfall as quickly as possible. Staff told us the registered manager was kind and approachable. However, some staff expressed concerns that timely action in response to shortfalls was not always taken by the management team.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they felt able to share any concerns they might have. People and families told us they felt able to speak with the manager and one person told us, “I have no complaints if I want anything I just ask.”

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. Staff told us they felt supported and well-treated by the registered manager and provider although some staff had concerns about staffing levels and access to training.

The service did not always have clear systems of accountability or good governance. Information about risk, performance and outcomes were not always used to drive improvements. Audits and systems for checks were not being used effectively to identify areas of shortfall such as those we found in relation to record keeping and the environment. A variety of audits were completed by the management team including checks of care plans and medicines, but these were generic and did not lend themselves to focusing on the areas for improvement such as those we identified during our site visit. Improvements were needed to the processes of oversight to drive improvement and ensure good quality records were maintained. Despite this, there was no evidence that this negatively impacted on people using the service.

The service 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. We received positive feedback from partner agency about how staff and the service worked in partnership.

The service did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They did not always actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research. There was a lack of effective oversight and governance to enable learning and improvements to be made, the care plan and recording system in place at the time of the system were not being used effectively to ensure oversight and learning but new systems were in the process of being implemented. The provider, registered manager and staff were responsive to feedback and keen to learn, improve and develop.