Freeland House 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

The home was well led. There was a clear and effective management structure which aided the smooth running of the home. Staff were positive about management of the home and told us the provider and the management team were supportive. Staff felt they were listened to and kept informed of improvement plans. The provider had oversight of the service and effective quality assurance systems in place that they used to monitor the quality and safety of the service. The provider’s systems and processes allowed them to continuously learn and improve across the organisation. Action plans from governance processes were used to improve people’s outcomes both locally and further afield. Whilst some staff felt confident to speak up, others did not due to personal relationships within the management team. There was no clear process in place for staff to follow when there were personal relationships within the management team which could deter staff from raising concerns. The provider took action and updated their policy to ensure that staff could speak up when they needed to.

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.

The provider’s policies and procedures had been reviewed and were supportive of people and staff involvement. Records showed there was more transparency regarding people’s needs and care provision.

Staff told us the provider's vision and strategy were transparent and inclusive which allowed meaningful engagement with people. People and staff input were sought and used to make improvements in care.

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.

The provider told us there was a positive culture in the home where staff were encouraged to speak up. Whilst some staff felt confident to speak up, others did not due to personal relationships within the management team. Staff comments included, “Manager is available, supportive and listens to us. Any concerns she investigates and supports us”, “It’s pointless raising concerns about a manager in a relationship with the other. How could they listen to me over their partner”, “Well, I don’t feel comfortable going to the manager due to personal relationships within the management team, so I go above them. It’s not the right chain of command but I know the manager above will listen to me” and “I am confident to go to my manager if I had concerns. She is very approachable and has an open-door policy.”

The provider’s policies and procedures encouraged people, staff and relatives to speak up through different channels. However, there was no process in place for staff to follow when there were personal relationships within the management team which could deter staff from raising concerns. The provider took action and updated their policy to ensure that staff could speak up when they needed to.

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.

Staff told us there was a clear management structure. The home was led by an approachable and supportive registered manager who was supported by an area manager, deputy manager, unit manager and clinical and care manager. Staff comments include, “In this home, our management team is very approachable. Office door is always open to all the staff. They are very supportive and flexible”, “I am confident to go to my manager if I had concerns. She is very approachable and open-door policy. Most of the days manager available until 8 pm” and “I think our home is managed well. We have staff meetings, residents meeting and family meeting. I think that's a good opportunity to everybody to share their thoughts.” The provider was supportive and had a clear oversight of the service. Staff told us they embraced champion roles in all areas of care as this provided them with ownership opportunities for their work.

The provider had effective quality assurance systems which continuously identified areas of improvement. For example, increase in pressure risk had resulted in further staff training and improved processes on seeking tissue viability nurse support in a timely manner. There was an emphasis on continuously improving the service and the provider had oversight of what was happening in the service. Audits included all aspects of care including health and safety checks, safe management of medicines and people's care records.

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.

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.