Richmond Village Aston On Trent 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

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 assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment 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 the governance of 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 provider 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. The provider and leaders promoted a positive and compassionate culture to drive the providers values and strategy forward. The registered manager told us, “We know we cannot have happy residents if we have a disengaged staff team, high turnover, high agency etc. And having a happy staff team that cares for its residents makes so much difference".

Whilst we found leaders at all levels were visible within the service and they led by example, we found they did not always identify issues which we found during this assessment. The registered manager was newly registered at the service and was aware of some improvements needed and eager to drive further improvement.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider had mechanisms in place for people, staff and relatives to give feedback. Where feedback was sought, this was analysed for patterns and trends. Regular communication was sent out to show where improvements were being made.

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. The provider had launched a system to celebrate diversity, this included holding engagement events to help educate staff. The registered manager told us, “We have a zero tolerance to discrimination”.

Systems and processes in place to assess, monitor and mitigate the risks relating to the health, safety and welfare of service users did not always identify areas for improvement found during the assessment. For example, shortfalls found within infection prevention and control and people’s care records.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement. The registered manager told us, “It is essential to work in partnership with all professionals to ensure the best possible care is delivered. We aim to always work in partnership and have established positive relationships”.

The service did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. Whilst the provider had made some improvements at the service since the last inspection, not all areas of improvements which we previously identified had been made. For example, risk was not always managed effectively, and behavioural support plans did not always capture sufficient personalised detail to support people at times of distress or agitation.