Larkhill Hall

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

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. All reportable incidents and accidents had been escalated and investigated appropriately, and organizational learning had been implemented and communicated to staff during team meetings. Staff told us they could approach the manager if they had any concerns and they had noticed an improvement in the service since the last inspection. Feedback was gathered and analyzed for patterns and trends. The senior managers were aware of their roles with regards to duty of candor, and were open and transparent regarding the previous and remaining issues at the home they were trying to fix. Governance systems, though these were improved and had highlighted some areas of improvement, further work was needed to ensure these systems were imbedded robustly into the service.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Since the last inspection a new provider had taken over the service. There was a new manager who was in the process of registering with CQC. The provider had brought in a team to support the on-site management to identify and drive improvements in the quality of care across the service. Staff felt the new management approach was helping to move the service in the right direction, they felt able to speak up and part of a team.

Staff felt supported by the new managers and the ‘task force’ that had been deployed to Larkhill to support and help core staff. One staff member told us, “[The manager] is lovely. [The deputy manager] is also lovely. Both are approachable.” staff also spoke positively about the provider and welcomed changes which were being made to their ways of working.

All staff spoken with on day 1 and 2 expressed that they would have no concerns speaking up if they observed something they were not happy with. Staff understood the whistleblowing process and one staff commented that there is a poster in the canteen with the number to call if you have whistleblowing concerns. There were processes in place for staff to follow if they needed to raise concerns. There was also information availible in accessible formats for people to help support them to understand who to raise any concerns or complaints with.

All staff said they felt well supported by seniors and managers within the service, they felt communication was open and transparent. One staff member said they felt well supported by the managers during their induction and the company ethos had been communicated to them. Another staff member told us, “I love it here. I have no care concerns. I have raised concerns and [the management team] have taken notice and acted.” Processes evidenced staff were well supported through induction and training and refreshers were arranged when needed. All staff had engaged in a recent supervision and staff from different shift patterns had been able to attend team meetings due to them being arranged at different times.

There was a range of auditing systems in place which had identified a number of improvements needed. The senior leaders at the home had already started to make some improvements. However this required monitoring in order to be more efficient, as we still found concerns in relation to medicines and some risk assessments. Audits had identified concerns and improvement needed to some of the content of people’s care plans. We viewed some of the updated care plans and saw these changes had been implemented. There were still some areas requiring more greater oversight of governance. For example, some of the issues we found with people’s care plans had not been picked up by an audit. The safeguarding log was difficult to understand and had not been picked by managers. There was a range of meetings, both with the staff team and the people who lived at the home and their relatives to ensure feedback was captured and listened to, and key messages regarding the home were communicated. The manager told us “We knew we had to make things better, so we are working hard to ensure people feel safe.” Staff had access to emergency contacts through an on call system, and told us the manager was always available for support if needed.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership. The provider had been working on developing a plan to drive improvements to the service. This included drawing on internal and external partners to review current practices within the home, and to develop and implement best practice in the areas of nutrition and dementia care. People's care plans contained important information about their care preferences and personal histories. Family members confirmed they had been informed about recent changes made, such as decisions to move people to different areas of the service. The provider had worked closely with the local commissioning teams to ensure action plans were clearly drawn up and shared regularly.

There was processes in place for ensuring lessons were learnt from shortfalls in service provision. This included organisational learning meetings, the outcomes of these meetings were communicated to staff via team meetings or individually at supervision sessions. The provider was open and honest regarding the ongoing work needed at Larkhill to ensure the home was running at a better standard. Staff told us they felt the home had improved overall since the last inspection and felt more 'settled'.