Meadow Grange

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

There had been a recent change of registered manager supporting with oversight to monitor the quality of care and to continue to drive improvements​. Leaders at the service promoted an approachable, compassionate and inclusive leadership style. Meetings scheduled for people, relatives and staff were underway with minutes available. Systems and processes were effective at identifying areas to develop or ensuring improvements had been made in a timely manner. There had been an action plan in place, supporting the transition of the registered manager, the implementation of the digital system, and general improvements which were overseen by the nominated individual. The service worked in partnership with health and social care partners, collaborating when required to support people to achieve any goals or outcomes. ​​The provider understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour. There were measures in place to help ensure any concern or shortfall, could be reported and resolved.

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.

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.

The leaders at the service evidenced the knowledge, skills and competency to lead effectively. They fully understood their responsibilities, for example to notify the Local Authority and CQC of relevant events. Staff spoke positively about the management and felt they demonstrated good leaderships skills. People told us they had opportunities to speak up individually, and there were well attended monthly meetings where they were encouraged to feedback about the service. Staff told us they felt able to approach the registered manager or senior leaders within the organisation, with any concerns. The registered manager was well supported by the provider. We saw the provider had supported them to develop and improve a number of areas.

Systems and processes were in place and effective. These supported positive relationships between people, managers, senior leaders, and staff. For example, people were involved in resident committee meetings and staff meetings had recommenced; this enabled open and transparent discussions between people, the registered manager, and staff. This meant issues could be raised and then receive any further assistance, guidance, or help.

Feedback processes were seen, including surveys and questionnaires which had been completed by both people and staff. The service produces a regular newsletter for people and families and there are regular meetings scheduled. Opportunities to give feedback to the provider about any worries or concerns had also been provided. The provider’s complaints policy detailed who they could speak to about any concerns.

Staff told us they felt confident in speaking up and raising concerns. We saw examples where staff had reported and recorded their concerns appropriately. The registered manager demonstrated an understanding of the duty of candour and recognised the importance of supporting people and staff to feel able to speak up. Staff told us they understood ‘whistleblowing’ and knew what they would do and who to go to if they had any concerns. Staff told us felt able to raise any concerns with senior staff and management and confirmed they felt they would be listened to. Staff were very approachable, and we saw they made themselves available for residents and visitors.

The service was striving to create an inclusive and fair culture for all people and staff. We saw examples of how they incorporated inclusivity and prevented prejudice in both polices and practice. We were told of the measures in place to support positive working and ensuring fair and equitable treatment. For example, in recruitment, where competence and experience were the shortlisting priority.

We were told there was an inclusive culture at the service. We saw the service was very busy and bustling with activity. All the staff worked well together as a team and all staff appeared to know their individual roles. Communication was good and we observed senior staff supporting more junior colleagues. The registered manager told us they had an open-door policy to support as and when required. They explained how opportunities were made available to support staff wellbeing and preventing any conflict or prejudice, whilst still being respectful to all parties.

Staff were generally complimentary about the manager, and advised the roles of the leadership team were growing stronger. Staff had shared how the opportunities for learning and development had been a positive move as they felt they could be more responsive and take action. The registered manager told us how expanding the leadership team had been valuable in promoting staff’s awareness and knowledge. The manager had been in post for only a few months when we visited. They had worked hard to improve the quality monitoring processes during this time. We saw the significant detailed progress made on the provider’s action plan.

The provider used recognised processes to clarify the roles and responsibilities of staff. This meant staff had learned to be accountable, helped make improvements, and continuously improved practice. Records demonstrated they took opportunities to learn how to help reduce risks to people when things had gone wrong, as well as recognising and rewarding when things had worked well. This helped to promote a safer environment and led to better care experiences for people.

We saw how the service was collaborating and working in partnership with people and staff as well as external agencies. We saw information on notice boards were up to date; there were choices for activities, updates to menu’s and lists of upcoming events displayed. These changes made with input from people, staff and wider agencies were positive. This demonstrated that when the provider asked for ideas and feedback, they had been listened to; they planned to continue to use this method to improve the service.

Partner agencies who spoke with us had been positive about their experience. We saw there were regular interactions with external professionals and positive working relationships had developed.

Staff told us of a positive working relationship with partner agencies. One staff explained about the advice currently being sought from professionals and how there were regular opportunities to engage. There were visits by District Nurses, Chiropody, Pharmacy and the GP visits on a weekly basis. The registered manager was proud of the work which had been done recently, in establishing a positive relationship with all of these teams.

People told us overall, the service worked well for them. One person told us, “The new manager is very kind to me, If I want to talk to her all I have to do is ask” another said, “I did complain to the manager, and she sorted my problem out for me”. We saw there were a lot of community activities available which had been led and managed by the newly formed residents committee. People told us there were a range of health professionals visiting, that could be made available for them.

Staff told us they felt they were supported to develop their skills and knowledge to improve their service. Staff had opportunities to further aide their learning, with the introduction of a new training system. We saw how medicine management had been an area identified for improvement last year. The registered manager told us how changing the pharmacy provider, working in partnership with the GP pharmacist to review medications, re-visiting staff training and competencies, was found to have been most beneficial and made the service safer. This demonstrated a commitment by staff and the service to continue with learning and improvement for safe practice.

Where people and staff were given choice and control over change and when people felt listened to, this was demonstrated with improved life experiences and outcomes. The provider’s quality and safety assessments of service detailed those improved outcomes for people, as well as ensuring the service was operated safely. Following the appointment of the registered manager; an action plan, supported by the provider, had highlighted the priority areas for improvement. Leaders maintained a comprehensive oversight and recording of actions to further improve the service and had shared these regularly with partner agencies.