Caddington Grove

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

Some of the audits completed by the management team were not always effective in identifying areas for improvement. For example, in areas such as reviewing daily records to ensure they were completed fully. Some relatives felt communication from the management and staff team could be improved. These issues were already being addressed by the management team. The registered manager and provider had a clear vision for the service and worked with the staff team to help provide good care to people. The registered manager and provider understood their responsibilities and were keen to use audits to find and implement improvements at the service. People, relatives, and staff were supported to raise concerns, and these were taken seriously and responded to. Staff felt well supported in their roles and enjoyed working at the service. Staff worked well with other partners such as health professionals and the local community to help people achieve good outcomes. The management and staff team were open and honest through the assessment process and took our feedback seriously, starting to take action to continue to make improvements immediately.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager and provider spent time with people and staff throughout the day. They fed back any positive examples of care to staff and also any areas where improvements may need to be considered. One relative told us, ‘‘The registered manager takes things seriously and seems to want to address issues before they become issues if that makes sense. I think the care is fantastic.’’ The provider also had regular meetings with the registered manager to discuss the culture of the service and anything they could support with.

The registered manager and provider had a clear vision for the service and how people living there should be supported. They poke about how best to support people with staff in meetings and supervisions and the registered manager was also present around the service during the day to see how people were being supported and speak with staff. Staff were passionate about supporting people and clearly enjoyed their job roles. Staff did not wear uniforms and instead wore clothing they would wear on a day-to-day basis. They were also not introduced or referred to as ‘carers’ but as ‘homemakers.’ This had been well received by people and relatives who told us it gave the service a good feeling and felt less like a care home. One person said, ‘‘It is lovely that it is not clinical here. It is like being helped by your friends.’’

The registered manager spent time directly with people and staff to ensure people were receiving good care. However, during our site visit we observed some times when people’s care was not in line with the providers values. This included some examples of staff not treating people fully with dignity and respect at meal times and speaking about people’s personal care and health needs where other people could hear. The registered manager and provider were unhappy to hear this feedback and said it was an unusual thing to happen. However, they still took action to address this and sent us evidence of how they would improve in this area going forward. The registered manager worked hard to keep their knowledge up to date and attended training and forums to help enhance their knowledge. They also sourced specific training for staff if this was needed such as in relation to people’s specific support needs. This helped ensure staff had the knowledge to support people as best they could.

The registered manager and provider were passionate about providing the best care they could to people. The registered manager was knowledgeable and knew what their role entailed. They took time to speak with people and the staff team on a regular basis. They took our feedback about some relatives feeling communication in some areas could be improved seriously and took immediate action to address this. Staff spoke positively about the support they had from the management team and the provider. One relative said, ‘‘I think [registered manager] is doing a great job. Certainly no concerns from my point of view.’’ One person told us, ‘‘I see [registered manager] walking around all the time so they must know what is going on. They come and chat with me.’’

People and relatives told us they felt confident speaking up about any concerns and these were listened and responded to in a timely manner. One person said, ‘‘If I have any niggles I just tell the staff.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘The few concerns I have had have been dealt with very quickly. I am sure if I had anything else to raise the same thing would happen.’’ Staff had the option to speak up in meetings but also informally at any time they wished to do so. There was a detailed whistleblowing in place for staff to speak up outside of the service if they needed to do this. The registered manager had an open and honest relationship with the provider and was able to raise any concerns directly with them.

The provider had as complaints policy and procedure in place for people and relatives to use. They kept a record of complaints and the responses given to help ensure issues did not recur and to learn from the concerns that had been raised with them. The registered manager and provider encouraged staff to speak up in meetings and supervisions. The provider showed us evidence of how feedback from people speaking up had been used to improve some aspects of the service.

Staff told us they were well supported in their job roles and could raise concerns with the registered manager. The registered manager and provider told us how they supported staff with flexible working requests as far as possible and welcomed staff with varying levels of experience.

The provider’s recruitment process was fair and equitable. The provider had processes in place for staff to request time off for events that were important to them or to accommodate staff requests. Staff were asked for their feedback regularly both formally and informally through surveys and discussions.

The registered manager and provider had audits in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, these were not always effective in identifying where improvement could be made as we found during this assessment process. For example, daily records not being completed fully, some care plans and risk assessments needing more detail, medicines processes and the ability to find trends in relation to incidents and accidents. These are discussed in other aspects of this assessment report. The registered manager and provider showed us evidence and assured us these improvements would be made. The provider and registered manager discussed risk at the service regularly and put measures in place to help reduce risk. These were also shared with the staff team.

Staff spoke with confidence about their job roles and were knowledgeable about the training they had to be effective in them. One relative said, ‘‘I think the staff are well trained. They know how to help [family member] feel better which is great. They really seem to know them well as a person.’’ The registered manager and provider spoke passionately about their roles. They spoke about their plans to continue upskilling the staff team with specific training courses and supporting staff to become ‘champions’ in areas such as moving and handling and supporting people living with dementia. The staff team knew what was expected of them and the registered manager worked with them to understand how best to support people. One person said, ‘‘All the staff treat me the same way. They all know how I like things.’’

The registered manager ensured the staff team knew how to get support from health professionals if people needed this. Staff updated care plans and risk assessments in a timely manner following any advice from health professionals. There were also daily huddle meeting with management and weekly staff meetings to help ensure any changes to people’s care and support based on professionals advice was shared. This helped ensure all staff were aware of how to support people in line with this advice.

We received positive feedback from partners and professionals who worked with the service. One health professional told us, ‘‘I have no concerns with how the service supports people. They are well looked after and staff follow the advice we give. The nursing staff get in contact with us if they have any more questions.’’ Other partners said the registered manager and staff team worked well with them when there were incidents related to safeguarding. They worked with each other to help improve the safety of people living at the service, for example by putting more staffing in place if a person was at high risk of falls.

Staff knew how to contact health professionals if people needed this support and told us they had good working relationships with professionals such as nurses and physiotherapists. Some staff at the service were dedicated to organising social events outside of the service for people who were interested in taking part in these. These staff engaged people in community events such as visiting museums or taking part in events such as remembrance days. Evidence showed people enjoyed taking part in these. One relative said, ‘‘It is great that [family member] is supported to get out and about.’’ The registered manager and provider had a good relationship with partners such as the local authority commissioners and safeguarding team and worked with them to improve people’s care where necessary.

The registered manager collated information from audits to put service improvement plans in place. These detailed actions needing to be taken to help continually improve the service. The provider kept up to date with best practice guidance and used this to help inform how people were supported at the service.

Staff told us lessons learnt from incidents and areas where improvements could be made were discussed with them in meetings and supervisions. They told us they wanted people living at the service to have the best experience of care they could have and were keen to continually improve. The registered manager and provider were also keen to continually improve. The provider shared learning from other services where things had gone well to help achieve this. The registered manager took feedback from our inspection seriously and started to put improvement in place based on this during the assessment process.