Newhaven

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

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last inspection we rated this key question as required improvement with a breach identified. At this assessment the rating was rated as inadequate.

This meant there were significant shortfalls in leadership. We found that there were aspects of a culture that did not reflect a culture of openness or transparency. There were no systems of management or governance to ensure care was safe or being delivered in line with regulation and that people were safe.

The provider was in continued breach of Regulation 17, Good Governance, of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

At this assessment we identified a further breach pertaining to Staffing and a breach of registration regulations, regulation 12 schedule 3.

This service scored 36 (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 did not have a clear shared vision and shared direction to ensure each individual person was at the centre of their support when decisions about their lives were being made. There was a lack of management and provider oversight to ensure right care, right support and right culture was being considered in line with the guidance. The provider had not implemented effective systems of governance and there were no aims to develop and maximise people’s potential. There was no evidence these areas had been audited by leaders with actions taken to make improvements. The provider was unable to share a statement of purpose. A statement of purpose provided information on the aims and objectives of the service.

The provider did not ensure leaders at all levels understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of right care, right support, right culture. Whilst managers and staff told us managers were capable and compassionate; we found evidence which showed managers were not capable of running the service openly and with transparency or in a way which supported clear oversight. The registered manager had not complied with conditions of their registration to notify us when certain incidents had occurred. The registered manager was not aware of the need to submit notifications to the Care Quality Commission and demonstrated very little awareness of their legal responsibilities.

The provider did not ensure regular engagement with people and their representatives. There were no systems or processes to promote people’s voices being heard. Staff told us they knew how to whistle blow and would if they had concerns about any abuse. Information was not visible in the service for people, staff and family members to raise concerns.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The provider did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They did not have a proactive learning culture embedded in the service. There were no processes to ensure that lessons were learnt, and improvements made. There was no oversight of accidents and incidents, and management of safeguarding concerns. Staff supervisions and staff training compliance was low. Partners told us they had concerns regarding leadership and oversight and were working closely with the management team to make improvements. The provider did not assess risk in the environment and did not have oversight of performance and outcomes. The model of care was not in line with current best practice guidance of right support, right care, right culture.

The provider did not always understand their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. Leaders had not worked with people, their representatives and staff to build a culture that focused on enabling people to enjoy their lives. The provider had not engaged others so people could thrive, develop skills, have new experiences and live the life they choose. Promoting independence plans were not present in peoples care file.

The provider told us they realised there was a lack of effective systems to ensure they learnt and improved from concerns or incidents and told us they were receiving support from partner agencies, for example, the local authority to assist them in improving their systems of oversight and governance. The provider did not have current best practice guidance for staff for right support, right care, right culture which focused on enabling people.