Telford 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

Improvements were needed to the provider’s governance systems as they were not always effective in identifying or improving shortfalls. There was a clear staffing structure in place and staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff received regular training and were supported through regular supervisions. Complaints were taken seriously and responded to. People, their relatives and staff felt confident in raising concerns. People’s views were sought, valued and responded to.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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.

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.

Staff knew how to raise concerns and felt confident in doing so when needed. One member of staff said, “Our views are listened to and we work well as a team and communication is good.” The manager told us they encouraged staff to bring concerns to their attention at any time. People and their relatives told us they felt confident in raising concerns. One person said, “It’s lovely here and I get what I need. The staff are lovely and I can speak to them if I wasn’t happy.” A relative told us, “The staff are lovely, and we are always made to feel welcome. When we ask for something it generally gets done.”

There were effective systems in place to respond to any concerns raised. Records showed that concerns and complaints were dealt with in a timely manner. Staff had access to a confidential ‘speak up’ helpline and a whistleblowing policy was in place.

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.

A temporary manager was in place whilst a new manager, who would apply to be registered with us, was being recruited and due to commence employment in April. The manager was aware of their responsibility to maintain standards of governance and oversight of the service. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities within the team and how these contributed to ensuring the safety and quality of the service. A member of staff said, “The training is really good. We have a brilliant trainer who comes to the home and we are given opportunities to progress in our role.” Another member of staff told us, “[Name of manager] is really supportive.”

There was a clear staffing structure in place which meant staff were supported by experienced staff who were appropriately trained. Registered nurses were on duty in the units which provided nursing care to people. Staff training, skills and competence were regularly monitored through supervisions, appraisals and regular refresher training. Staff were aware of the whistleblowing procedure and said they would use this if the need arose. In accordance with their legal responsibilities, the manager had informed us about significant events which occurred at the home within required timescales. The ratings of our previous inspection had been clearly displayed in the home and on the provider's website.

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.

Regular internal checks and audits were completed and actions were added to the service improvement plan to ensure there was continuous improvement. The provider also used their area manager and an external consultant to carry out quality audits of the service. However, these systems had not always been effective in identifying shortfalls. For example, audits had not identified the shortfalls relating to the management and administration of people’s medicines. There were systems in place to learn from accidents, incidents and complaints. These were reviewed by the manager and senior management team and any learning was shared with the staff team to ensure action was taken to reduce the risk of similar incidents happening again.

The views of people and staff were valued and responded to. A ‘you said, we did’ poster was displayed in the home detailing the action taken in response to people’s feedback. This included arranging visits from local school children and organising a covered area in the garden for people. Actions had also been identified following a staff survey, these included more management presence on the floor.