• Care Home
  • Care home

Roman House

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Winklebury Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG23 8BJ (01256) 328329

Provided and run by:
Salutem LD BidCo IV Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Report from 14 December 2023 assessment

On this page

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 22 March 2024

The service was not always well-led. The provider failed to ensure quality assurance processes were effective and the governance and leadership in the service had been inconsistent. This resulted in a breach of regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Senior leaders acknowledged the shortfalls and told us of their plans to make the necessary improvements to ensure people received safe and compassionate care that met their needs and preferences. A new manager had just started at Roman House and told us they wanted to improve the service for the people living there. Staff felt positive about this.

This service scored 46 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 2

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 2

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Freedom to speak up

Score: 2

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 2

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 1

Leadership arrangements had not ensured the safety and quality of the service. At the time of our assessment, there was not a registered manager in post and there had been inconsistent management, oversight, and support of the home for approximately 1 year. This led to shortfalls in the quality and safety of care people received. We found 3 breaches of regulation. Although the provider had quality assurance processes they were not always followed. Audits were completed inconsistently and when they identified concerns, action was not always taken. As detailed in the safe section of this report, we found issues relating to the environment, staffing and medicines that the provider’s audits showed had been ongoing for some time. The lack of governance and consistent leadership also meant staff sometimes felt unsure of their roles and responsibilities or did not have the time, skills or resources to undertake these sufficiently. Despite raising concerns using the providers quality assurance systems, these were not effectively addressed. Systems in place had not ensured records were always complete in relation to people's medicines. The leadership team had plans in place to improve their quality assurance systems.

Staff meeting minutes and audits showed staff had been raising their concerns about the lack of governance and leadership for some time. For example, 1 audit from October 2023 stated, ‘[A staff member] really struggled with lack of management, spoke about difficulties with no manager around for much of the year and offering little to no support.’ and ‘There is a great concern relating to audit completion and compliance.’ Despite this, action had not been taken. Leaders told us they recognised the gaps in governance and had plans in place to learn lessons and make improvements. This included undertaking a full review of their audits. The new manager told us about some of the plans to make improvements in the service. Staff were positive about the new manager and were hopeful they would be better supported.

Partnerships and communities

Score: 2

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 2

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.