Field House Rest 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

The rating for this key question has improved. We have rated this key question as good.

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 at the service worked together to promote an environment where people's individual differences were respected and valued, and staff were encouraged to develop. The manager encouraged staff to have lead roles such as person centred champion, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, or asexual (LGBTQIA+) champion and dignity champion. The registered manager told us the senior leadership who oversaw this location was very supportive. The manager was part of a care home managers support network. This enabled them to attend 'manager days' during which they worked with managers from other homes to share information and ideas. Staff told us, "All staff and management work together to make sure people are being cared for how they should be. The management is supportive and encourages us to progress in the organisation.

The service had a vision and set of values which staff knew about. The registered manager gave examples of how they were embedding the home's values. This included a new board to highlight staff had gone 'Above and Beyond' where other staff can nominate them.

Staff we spoke with were positive about the registered manager. They stated the registered manager was open, approachable and supportive . The registered manager told us they felt they had an 'open door policy' and this helped to reduce complaints as they were able to give quick responses to people.

Systems were available to ensure staff had access to the management team for advice when they needed it, this included having on-call arrangements for out of hours support when needed. Managers conducted daily 'walkarounds' to ensure they had a visible presence in the home and could identify concerns quickly.

Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about how and where to raise any concerns. Staff told us they were confident to do this and knew how to escalate their concerns if they felt action had not been taken.

Processes were in place to seek feedback from people, relatives and staff. One relative had recorded in the provider survey, "Manager responds to any concern and I'm confident she is doing all she can to do her best for her residents". There were relevant policies and procedures in place to support staff and management to speak up and we saw these were kept up to date.

Staff were positive about working at the home and were encouraged to learn about diversity and equality to support people holistically. One staff told us they enjoyed working at home as the management were very supportive, and they would recommend that the home is a good place to work.

The provider had relevant policy and procedures in place to support workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. We saw from the provider’s training matrix that the majority of staff had completed training in topics such as gender and sexual diversity, equality and diversity, and promoted using staff ‘champions’ for example for LGBQT+ areas.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities within the team and how these contributed to ensuring the safety and quality of the service. There was a clear management and staffing structure and staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

The registered manager and provider had oversight of the quality of the running of the service provided. There was an audit programme in place along with a service improvement plan to improve the safety and quality of care. However, not all risks to the service had been identified. For example, we found some areas where the environment was not clean. We also identified two instances where statutory notifications had not being submitted when legally required. Following our site visit we were sent assurances that processes had been improved to ensure all required notifications would be submitted in future. The provider had relevant policies and procedures in place to assist with the governance of the service, this included an up-to-date business continuity plan.

People did not raise any concerns with us in regard to the service working in partnership with others.

Staff told us that a variety of health and social care professionals were involved in supporting people and we saw that referral had been made to health professionals when needed.

We received positive feedback from partners and stakeholders. They told us the service worked collaboratively with them and they had no concerns for peoples welfare.

The provider and registered manager understood their duty to work in collaboration with other care professionals. Staff encouraged professionals coming into the home to complete feedback forms. We saw that one professional had commented about what they liked about the home, "The managers and their visibility within the home for anyone to approach them ,and also their readiness to ask for advise/ assistance when required".

The registered manager told us the provider was very supportive towards improving the quality and safety of the home. They were part of a care home managers support network, and had manager days when they got together with managers from other homes and shared information and ideas.

The management team were proactive in using information from audits, complaints, incidents and safeguarding alerts to improve the service. They ensured learning was shared with staff and used to improve the quality of care provided. The service valued it’s staff team and encouraged their development.