The Fieldings

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

There were clear and effective governance arrangements. This meant the quality of care was overseen well. Staff understood their role and responsibilities. There was a positive culture, where the staff team strived to provide the best quality care. Staff fed back positively about the management team and felt well supported. We saw that the management team had considered staff health and worked with them to ensure their role could be completed safely. There was an indoor smoking room and staff wellbeing around second hand smoke had not been considered. The registered manager agreed to review this. There was clear partnership working with external stakeholders. The management team were open and transparent, allowing them to learn from incidents and aim to improve.

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 reported a positive culture. They explained that they were well supported by the leadership team and staff were motivated to provide good quality care for people.

There was a positive culture, that always strived to improve the care provided. Meeting minutes showed that staff were involved in improving the service and making suggestions. Documents were regularly reviewed and edited. The improvements made to blank documents, allowed staff to record what care was provided in the most effective way.

Staff explained that they had good wellbeing. They felt the management team were supportive and they were always listened to.

There was an indoor smoking room. This room resulted in second hand smoke across the care home environment. There had not been an assessment of how people and staff felt living/working in this environment. The registered manager started sending surveys out to staff during the assessment visit. The registered manager had different processes in place, to ensure that staff were well supported. This included regular meetings with staff and walking around to observe staff wellbeing. Individual meetings and recruitment processes with staff had explored health conditions that could impact their role. The management team had then worked with staff to ensure they had effective support to remain safe.

Staff felt able to speak up about any concerns. They felt they would be listened to. The registered manager explained that staff received safeguarding training, this gave staff guidance on how to whistle blow if they felt they were not being listened to.

The service had a safeguarding policy. This policy guided staff on how to raise concerns and what to do if they felt action was not being taken. Meeting minutes showed that staff were able to raise concerns. These concerns were listened to, and the management team spoke with staff about how improvements could happen.

The registered manager had good oversight of diversity in the care home. They explained people’s nationalities, religions and lifestyle choices. They also had good knowledge of how staff promoted people’s equality.

There were processes in place to ensure people and staff’s lifestyle choices were understood and valued. For example, people’s diverse needs were assessed before they arrived at the care home and staff’s needs were considered during the recruitment process.

Staff told us that they were clear about their roles. They felt the management team had good oversight of their work and supported them to be skilled.

The registered manager had good oversight of the care provided. This included regularly walking around the home, meeting staff and people, and reviewing records. This oversight meant that good quality care was provided and overseen. During the assessment, they were quick to respond and resolve any concerns raised.

People experienced good care, which encompassed good partnerships with external health professionals and family members.

Staff explained that visitors were always welcomed, and people were supported to engage in activities outside the care home.

We spoke to two visiting health professionals. They reported that the staff team were good at contacting them and involving them in people’s care.

There were clear processes in place to ensure people’s changing needs were identified. This meant external health and social care professionals were contacted as needed and worked with effectively. The manager had good oversight. People were supported by external professionals and records were reviewed to ensure any care plan guidance included professional recommendations.

Staff explained that there was a positive culture where concerns could be raised to the management team and would be acted on. The registered manager explained that staff wrote down people’s needs. If staff found these documents could be improved or altered, then this was done. The registered manager showed us multiple documents which had been improved with staff consultation. This allowed staff to use this documentation in the most effective way that worked for them.

There was a strong culture of learning in the care home. The management team considered where things had gone wrong in other care homes. For example, they reviewed reports from coroner’s court or media articles. They then shared this learning with their staff team. The management sent out surveys to people using the service and staff. We saw that survey results had been reflected on and learnt from. During the assessment, the registered manager was transparent and proactive at responding to anything that the assessment team raised.