Lower Bowshaw View Nursing Home

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

At our last assessment we identified a breach of regulation, systems were either not in place or not robust enough to demonstrate safety was effectively managed, placing people at risk of harm. The provider has since our site visit appointed a new manager who was clear about their roles and responsibilities and understood quality assurance. However, at the time of our site visit we found concerns in relation to management of risk, medicines and staffing that had not been identified as part of the providers quality monitoring. Which resulted in a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Following feedback, the new management team gave us assurances the shortfalls would be addressed and included in future audits and new systems embedded into practice.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The staff tried to promote an open transparent culture that was inclusive and met the needs of people. However, due to lack of leadership, direction, and supervision this was not always possible. The management team were not fully aware of their roles and responsibilities and the lines of accountability. However, following our site visit the management team has been completely changed.

The new management team would be working alongside staff providing support and supervision to identify concerns and to help shape the culture of the service and ensure staff had a good understanding of vision for the service to provide positive outcomes for people in a person-centred way.

The new management team were aware of their roles and responsibilities and the lines of accountability. However, were also aware of the work required to support their staff to be able to provide an inclusive workplace.

The staff team promoted an inclusive environment. However, they told us although they could talk with managers, they did not always feel listened to or supported. Since our site visit the provider has informed us a new management structure is in place and new processes were being implemented to improve the service.

Staff said they supported each other as a team and spoke positively about the team. However, staff did not have regular supervision or support from their manager so did not feel their voice was heard.

People and their relatives felt they could raise concerns and felt listened to. However, felt issues were not always resolved. Processes were being improved by the new manager who was appointed by the providers restructure during our assessment.

Diversity was valued in the workforce. There was a culture of equality for people who worked for the organisation.

Processes were in place to promote equality and diversity and a fair culture.

The new manager is fully aware of the shortfalls and is working to improve quality monitoring to ensure effective governance. This will take time to recruit into the new posts, upskill staff through support and supervision and embed new systems.

The provider had systems in pace to quality monitor the service, however, many of these had not been completed and were therefore not effective. For example, the issues we identified at inspection had not been picked up by the providers QA systems.

People did not always receive a positive experience as the service did not always work in partnership with professionals and partner.

The new manager had a strong commitment to improving the service and was aware of the work required to improve systems to ensure information sharing and learning with partners.

The service did not share information and learning with partners for a collaborated approach to ensure improvement. Partners found communication and staff knowledge required improvement to ensure positive outcomes for people.

New processes are being developed by the new manager to ensure they work in partnership.

The management team did not appear to fully understand their duty of candour, to be open and honest when things went wrong. They were committed to improving the service but lacked experience and support from the provider. The management team has changed since our site visit and are implementing improvements that will then need to be embedded into practice.

The new manager was aware of the need to improve systems and processes to ensure learning and improvement.