Lampton House

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

People, their relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the culture and leadership of the home. Staff felt the management team were approachable, fair, and supportive. They were kept up to date, supported and felt involved in the service. We saw evidence that when concerns had been raised, the management team addressed these, and lessons were shared and acted on. Managers were open to ongoing learning and improvement. Progress against actions was monitored to ensure plans were achieved. The service had systems to monitor and improve standards and safety and action was taken when shortfalls or concerns were identified. Staff received training and understood equality, diversity and human rights principles. The provider was keen to ensure everyone felt included and valued in the organisation. People were supported by staff to take part in activities and pursue their interests. People were encouraged to maintain relationships that were important to them, and friends and family could visit at any time. There were well established links with other professionals which helped in providing good care provision and joined-up care.

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.

Staff and leaders promoted a positive culture and were committed to providing a good service to the people who lived at Lampton House. The registered manager told us they felt the service was a happy, family orientated and transparent environment which they personally enjoyed working in.

Regular team meetings, handovers, emails and supervision helped staff to feel involved in the service and kept updated about any risks or challenges. The nominated individual monitored and reviewed progress with improvements and plans at the service.

People, their relatives and staff were confident about the leadership of the home. Staff felt the management team were approachable, fair and supportive. The registered manager told us they received regular supervision, had meetings with peers and felt supported by the provider.

The registered manager and nominated individual both had a visible presence within the service and were available during our site visit. They had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively and were open and honest during this assessment. The nominated individual was knowledgeable and interested in wider issues such as the recent changes to CQC methodology and the implementation of the Single Assessment Framework

There was a positive culture where staff felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff felt confident that the management team would address any concerns they had. We saw evidence that, when concerns had been raised, the management team investigated them sensitively, and lessons were acted on and shared.

Staff had access to whistleblowing policies. The provider had systems to support staff when identifying concerns or raising issues.

There was a diverse workforce and staff told us they felt able to be themselves and did not fear discrimination. The registered manager told us there had not been many incidents where they had needed to provide support regarding staff protected characteristics. One issue where a person used racist language towards a member of staff had been satisfactorily resolved. New staff from overseas had recently joined the service. The registered manager was working with them to share elements of their culture with people who lived at Lampton House in an aim to support integration and celebrate the diversity within the service. This would bring a positive outcome and support equity and inclusiveness in the organisation.

Staff had access to equality and diversity policies and guidance, and reasonable adjustments could be made to meet specific needs such as caring responsibilities or religious obligations.

People and staff were complimentary about the management team and the other staff working in the home. Staff understood their role and responsibilities. They told us they felt they managed to maintain a quality service because they had good working relationships with residents, cared for them, wanted to keep them safe and provided person centred care.

At the last inspection, we identified a breach of regulations relating to good governance. At that time, we found governance systems did not always identify shortfalls or adequately monitor standards. At this assessment we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations. The provider had systems to monitor and improve standards and safety. Audits of topics such as medicines, falls and infection prevention and control were carried out regularly. There was oversight within the organisation which helped to hold staff to account, keep people safe, protect their rights and ensure quality care was provided. There was evidence that actions had been taken to resolve shortfalls or concerns.

People were encouraged to maintain relationships with those who were important to them, and visitors were welcome in the home. People and their relatives told us staff worked closely with health professionals, community groups and local churches. One person said, “I go out to the village hall, to a club, a friend takes me, also to the history society and I am part of bell ringers.” This showed the staff team worked with others to provide a service which met the full range of people’s individual needs.

Staff said there were good relationships with external stakeholders, and they appreciated that the district nurses and doctors who came to the service were familiar and consistent. We were given several examples of how the service supported people to access activities in the local community. This included activities such as swimming, walks, a club for people who have experienced a stroke, church services and local community events.

Other agencies told us the service worked in partnership with them to achieve good outcomes for people. A GP visited weekly and there was regular contact with community nursing, safeguarding and social work staff. Professionals told us information was shared proactively to support good care provision and joined-up care.

Lampton House had a good level of partnership working with other agencies and professionals. Staff and leaders were open and transparent during this assessment process and engaged fully with the assessment team.

Staff were encouraged to raise concerns and suggestions and told us they felt listened to. Staff surveys and regular team meetings supported ongoing review and development. Managers and the staff team were committed to providing the best outcomes for people. During the assessment managers acted promptly to address any suggested improvements.

The provider had an overall development plan and specific action plans which provided evidence of ongoing learning, innovation and improvement. Impact and outcomes were measured with people, relatives, staff and other professionals as relevant.