Nutley Lodge Care 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

Staff spoke about a supportive working environment. One relative said, “I can see the staff have real respect for the manager.” Another relative stated they would happily discuss any concerns with the registered manager. At this assessment the registered manager was honest and open with us about being aware of improvements that needed to be made to the service. The service did not always seek formal feedback from staff, people using the service, their relatives and external healthcare professionals The service did not always have effective governance and management systems in place to improve care and treatment for the people who use the service. We found the lack of effective governance and oversight of the service placed people at risk of harm. This was a breach of regulation 17 (governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

This service scored 62 (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.

Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and the registered manager and provider were always visible in the service. Throughout the assessment the registered manager and provider were open and honest with us. However the service was not able to evidence support provided to the staff from the registered manager.

The registered manager failed to identify areas of concern that were found on this assessment. The registered manager did not always have support to develop within their role. The provider was not able to evidence any supervisions or appraisals carried out with the registered Manager.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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 the registered manager had an open door policy and they would raise any concerns. One staff member said, “I have worked in many homes, (registered manager’s name) is one of the best” and another said, “Any concerns I would be happy to raise them, when I have raised concerns (registered manager name) does listen”. However we identified a concern at our assessment which had been reported the registered manager and appropriate action had not been taken.

We identified systems were either not in place or robust enough to ensure the quality and safety of the service. Within the management structure It was not always clear who took accountability of maintaining staff files. The service was not able to provide us with evidence of environmental risk assessments. We could not be assured audits had been effective in identifying, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service. There was little evidence of risks being identified, monitored and managed.

The registered manager told us about a recent programme they had enrolled in to improve record sharing between services. The registered manager also told us they were involved with care home forums and had contact with other registered managers to discuss best practice.

Partners told us the manager did not always engage with them to gain additional support or collaborate when improvements where required.

We observed systems and processes were in place to work in partnership with their local GP and community nursing service to escalate non emergency medical concerns.

The registered manager told us, “I am always wanting to progress my knowledge”. Staff told us they were kept up to date with any changes to the service, or people’s needs, at meetings at the start and end of their shift.

The registered manager was open and transparent throughout the assessment and was open to the feedback provided. The service had not received any complaints in the last year. The registered manager told us they did have a feedback form for staff, relatives and people who live at the service however these had not been provided to these people.