Forest Lodge Rest 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

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service 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 requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has remained as requires improvement. This meant the service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities. Leaders promoted people’s equal rights and ensured there was no workforce inequalities.

The service had inclusive leaders who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support. Leaders were visible within the service and lead by example to their staff team, demonstrating inclusive behaviours. However, leaders were not aware of any local support groups for providing support which would be beneficial to the service in order to access support and development in their roles.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff had access to regular supervision and support from leaders, promoting staff empowerment and involvement in the service. Staff we spoke with felt able to raise concerns to leaders.

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. Staff told us they work well as a team, and they do what they can to help each other. A staff member told us how leaders support their personal life and are flexible to ensure they are able to regularly visit their home country.

The service did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. The provider continued not to have effective governance systems in place to identify and drive improvements at the service. Audits were completed monthly by leaders but failed to identify gaps we found during our assessment. For example, where sufficient risk assessments were not in place to mitigate risks to people, where medicines were not stored, administered and managed safely and issues relating to infection prevention control and food hygiene. Leaders did not keep up to date with statutory guidance in relation to supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people. This meant the service was not working in line with ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance. The service had not identified the need for staff to be trained to support autistic people and people living with a learning disability.

The service did not always understand their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They did not always share information and learning with partners or collaborate for improvement. For example, appropriate referrals had not always been made to external health and social care professionals where this was required for people.

The service did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The provider had not ensured learning and improvement since the last inspection and appropriate improvements had not been made. Whilst we did identify shortfalls during this assessment, the provider was responsive to our findings and acted urgently on key areas of improvement.