Magna House

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

At our last inspection we rated this key question as Good. At this inspection the rating has remained the same. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care. We found that the current senior leadership team had implemented action plans and strategies to improve the governance and overall management of the service. This included additional training for all staff. Leaders celebrated having a culturally diverse workforce, implementing a range of experience and skill levels with the service as it better represented the patient group and the wider community. The service provided various innovative initiatives for its staff to maximise their skill set and practice which benefited the patient and their care and treatment. The service has a culture of openness and honesty, encouraging staff in all areas to provide feedback from which lessons could be learned to improve the service and the support it delivers.

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.

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.

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.

Leaders said they had an open culture, free from reproach and actively encouraged and supported staff to raise any issues or concerns that they had, either with the leadership team or psychology team. Leaders said they encouraged staff to feedback on areas within the service which they felt may be able to be improve upon operational and within patient care. Leaders said raising issues or concerns enabled the organisation to learn lessons which drove improvement and maintained the direction in which they wanted to go. Leaders said they wanted staff to feel comfortable and confident with the organisations vision, to take ownership and feel involved. They hope to be able to up-skill staff members in order to be provide the best care possible for their patients.

The provider had a whistleblowing (protected disclosure) policy and procedure in place. The policy encouraged staff to raise concerns internally and promoted the value of doing so. The policy signposted staff to external organisations if they felt the need to report concerns outside of the service. This included access to a freedom to speak up guardian to whom they could raise concerns. During the last 12 months there had been 1 grievance reported to management, which was appropriately investigated in line with the providers policy.

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.

Leaders said they invited both staff and patients to attend governance meetings to maintain positive working relationship and transparency. Leaders said have a key performance indicators (KPI) process which are presented and reviewed monthly. Leaders said they had clear expectations of what conduct, care and support the organisation should be providing, and they also spoke about the potential impact on the care and support if they did not meet their own standards. Leaders said that governance and all processes within the service were driven by best practice which were monitored for outcomes and in turn lessons were learned. Leaders said that they have robust audit procedures in place to safely manage sensitive data which allowed them to maintain people’s privacy, dignity and confidentiality. Leaders said that all grades of staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities with mandatory training provided were encouraged and supported to perform as well as possible.

We reviewed 2 health and safety team meeting minutes and 2 senior management team meeting minutes, which showed there was a clear framework of what must be discussed to ensure that essential information, such as learning from incidents and complaints, was shared and discussed. Staff participated in local clinical audits linked to a service improvement plan and risk register. The audits were sufficient to provide assurance and staff concerns matched those on the risk register. The service had plans for emergencies – for example, adverse weather or a flu outbreak.

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.