Valley View Court

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 assessment we rated this key requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 71 (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. The purpose of people’s stay at the home was clear in ensuring people made recovery or progress. The home had regular staff meetings to promote communication and generate new ideas. The home was transitioning to electrical systems. We received positive feedback from professionals regarding the transition. One professional said, “I also want to highlight the effectiveness of the new system, which will provide us with daily information that I trust will be maintained consistently.” We had limited feedback from staff, but those we had contact with felt the staff team were committed to helping people ensure had a good standard of care.

The registered manager explained they had an open-door policy in which staff were free to approach them. They also told us they did a walk around of the home each day, so they were visible to people, relatives and staff.

We saw evidence that the provider had policies and procedures in place to help staff feel they could speak up as part of induction. This was also covered during staff supervisions and meetings.

The home sought feedback meetings and satisfaction surveys. Feedback was collated to help make improvements at the service.

The provider promoted the equality and diversity of people. They ensured staff had equal opportunities, regardless of their abilities, their background, or their lifestyle.

We saw that the provider had an up to date recruitment policy and procedure.

The provider was previously in breach of regulation 17 Good governance of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 as the systems to record, assess, monitor and improve the home were not sufficiently robust. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

We found the management team undertook regular audits to monitor the quality of the service they provided. There was evidence that where any improvement was identified, actions were taken.

There was opportunity for people to access support from professionals, however we did not find this was always sought promptly. We received mixed feedback from professionals that the home could utilise support more to ensure people’s needs were being met effectively.

As part of our assessment, we received feedback from relatives who were positive about the way they worked with the home and how their loved ones were supported.

During our visits, we observed changes that had been made which were positive for the home. The registered manager also shared examples of where improvements had been made.

There was an emphasis of learning and improving within the service. Staff were given opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge.