Cherry Tree 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

The service had undergone recent changes in leadership. People, professionals and staff we spoke with were positive in their views of management at the home. The acting manager was approachable and was a visible presence throughout the service. People and staff were able to raise issues and give feedback. Quality assurance at the service had improved. Robust audits still needed to be embedded although although the provider and manager showed us this work had begun. Plans were in place in case of emergency and staff we spoke with told they felt confident in training and support they were given. Commissioners and healthcare professionals were positive in their feedback of service saying the team worked collaboratively. The service was also embarking on several pilot initiatives for older people with Teesside University and other peer support networks.

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.

The provider was responsive to our feedback and immediately took action to review and resolve staff recruitment interview records and staff deployment. Feedback from staff was positive in relation to their role and accountability. They felt well supported by both the manager and provider team. Staff had attended training on understanding their role and worked together to meet people’s needs. Some staff raised concerns about communication regarding a personnel issue and we fed this back to the provider who acknowledged they would review this.

The provider had a clear position around developing services which were person-centred and tailored to each person's needs. The policies and procedures the provider had in place were focused on upholding the diverse needs of people and local communities. A visiting advocate to the service told us, "On my visits to the care home, I observe staff, not just with my clients, but with other residents, and I have always been impressed with the way that they treat people, using a person centred approach, treating people without respect and dignity." A commissioning manager we spoke with said, "I very much enjoy working with the owners and manager of Cherry Tree and their wider group. I find them to be very engaged and proactive across the network in Stockton. "

Staff told us the acting manager promoted a positive, person-centred culture. The provider and full staff team put people’s needs and wishes at the heart of everything they did. One staff member told us, "Management is very friendly and supportive too." A commissioning manager told us, "The new manager is proactive and responsive to communications from myself and colleagues." Staff morale was good and we observed a positive working environment and atmosphere.

Systems were in place to check staff practices embodied the organisation’s culture and values. The provider was supporting and equipping the acting manager with the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. A commissioning manager shared the following with us, "Their managers regularly attend Leadership and peer support networks, provider forums and any other relevant events put on by the Local Authority."

Staff felt supported by the manager and the management team. Some staff shared with us on our visit that communication could be improved regarding the organisation's management plans, but we know this was addressed following our visit in a staff meeting. Staff were able to speak freely with inspectors and offered privacy to do so during our visit. One staff we spoke with said, "If I don’t feel comfortable doing something I won't do it and would speak up."

The provider had policies and systems in place, which aimed to foster a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and that their voice would be heard. We heard how the feedback from our onsite inspection was shared with the whole staff group via a staff meeting. This showed openness and transparency by the provider. Staff were knowledgeable of the procedure to whistleblow and were confident to raise any concerns.

Staff felt their rights were upheld and were unable to share any experience of when there had been any issues in this area. Staff confirmed they had a working environment which encouraged effective teamwork.

Staff recruitment was robust and fair and no evidence of any issues were found. The staff team was a diverse mix of different ages, genders and nationalities all in one team, and we observed and were told they worked together well. The provider had policies and systems in place, which aimed to foster a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and that their voice would be heard.

Staff were aware of emergency plans that were in place. Staff we spoke with felt listened too and able to contribute to the quality assurance process. We spoke with the operations director for the provider who shared with us openly, "I have done a recent meds audit and it was poor, as a result we have done lessons learnt, put staff on training and we have ensured that staff understand how they need to order medicines."

We saw improvement plans were in place and plans in the event of emergencies, which were regularly reviewed. Quality assurance surveys had been carried out by the previous manager and although returns were low we did see actions in place from responses received. The acting manager had an effective system in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service and they said they were working hard to take audits to a higher level of rigour.

People told us they were happy with the support they received and felt staff were competent. Relatives felt staff were skilled and they contacted health professionals when this was needed. Activities staff linked with the local community to access facilities as well as utilising online resources for activities.

Staff we spoke with told us they had positive working relationships with community matrons and GP's who regularly visited the service. Staff understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership. Staff worked with external agencies and where appropriate shared information and learn with them.

Partners were extremely positive in their feedback of the engagement of the service with them. Commissioners and advocates shared the following with us, "Cherry Tree work exceptionally well on a multi agency basis, I am an independent advocate, and I am very confident that if there are any issues at all, I will be contacted immediately, and I know through reading care plans, that this is the case for other professionals as well", and "The new manager is proactive and responsive to communications from myself and colleagues."

Systems and processes were in place to enable the service to develop good links with the local community and work in partnership with other agencies to improve people's opportunities and wellbeing. They had the means to share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

Staff felt trained to meet people's needs and felt they could ask for more training if they felt it was needed or relevant.

Staff training was in place and a new and improved training matrix was being developed to track training needs and compliance. We saw the service had completed the local authority's care homes dementia accreditation promoting the home to be dementia friendly and to upskill and train staff regarding dementia. We were told by a local authority manager that the service took part in a pilot with the community matrons around how their proactive time could be best used to make improvements and support healthcare provision for people. This model was now used across the wider network to support services that were struggling with an escalation of medical need and complex people.