Staff Wellbeing Audit - Care Homes

Evidence to check

• • Current staff wellbeing policy or strategy is available and accessible
• • Policy covers mental health, workload, supervision, fatigue, bullying, sickness, retention and speaking up
• • Staff know what wellbeing support is available
• • Wellbeing actions are visible in practice, not only written in policy

Evidence to check

• • Named wellbeing lead, registered manager, HR lead or wellbeing champion is documented
• • Roles and responsibilities are clear
• • Staff know who they can approach for wellbeing concerns
• • Wellbeing leads review actions and escalate unresolved risks

Evidence to check

• • Management meeting minutes include wellbeing, morale, sickness, turnover and workload themes
• • Actions have owners and timescales
• • Progress is reviewed at later meetings
• • Repeated wellbeing concerns are escalated to provider or senior leadership

Evidence to check

• • Workforce plan or staffing plan is current
• • Plan considers vacancies, turnover, dependency, skill mix, agency use and training needs
• • Wellbeing impact of staffing pressures is considered
• • Plan is reviewed when resident needs or staffing risks change

Evidence to check

• • Dependency or acuity tool is used regularly
• • Rotas reflect resident needs, clinical risk and complexity
• • Staff feedback about workload is considered
• • Staffing concerns are acted on before they affect care quality or staff wellbeing

Evidence to check

• • Rota publication dates are monitored
• • Staff receive reasonable notice of shifts and changes
• • Late rota changes are minimised and explained
• • Staff feedback on rota fairness and work-life balance is reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Overtime and shift pattern reports are reviewed
• • Double shifts and short turnarounds are identified
• • Managers consider fatigue and safety before approving extra shifts
• • High overtime patterns trigger staffing or recruitment review

Evidence to check

• • Break arrangements are included in shift planning
• • Staff confirm they can take breaks in practice
• • Cover arrangements maintain resident safety during breaks
• • Missed breaks are monitored and addressed

Evidence to check

• • Working hours are monitored
• • Opt-out agreements are recorded where applicable
• • Rest periods between shifts are considered
• • Breaches or concerns are reviewed and corrected

Evidence to check

• • Fatigue risks are considered in rota planning
• • Night staff and long-shift staff are asked about fatigue and workload
• • Incidents, errors or sickness linked to fatigue are reviewed
• • Actions are taken to reduce fatigue-related risk

Evidence to check

• • Lone working risk assessments are completed where relevant
• • Check-in, emergency and escalation processes are in place
• • Staff know how to raise urgent concerns
• • Lone working incidents or concerns are reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Induction includes role expectations, supervision, wellbeing support and speaking-up routes
• • New starters know who to approach for support
• • Stress, workload and safety concerns are discussed during induction
• • Induction feedback is used to improve new starter support

Evidence to check

• • Shadowing records are completed
• • New staff are not placed in full responsibility before they are ready
• • Buddy or mentor arrangements are documented
• • New starter confidence and support needs are reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Probation review records are completed at expected intervals
• • Reviews include wellbeing, confidence, competence and workload
• • Support actions are agreed and followed up
• • Concerns are addressed early and fairly

Evidence to check

• • Supervision schedule is current
• • Supervision records include wellbeing, workload, stress and support needs
• • Actions from supervision are followed up
• • Staff confirm supervision is supportive and meaningful

Evidence to check

• • Appraisal records are current
• • Appraisals include goals, development, recognition and support needs
• • Career interests and retention risks are discussed
• • Actions from appraisal are reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Manager training includes supervision, mental health awareness, difficult conversations and signposting
• • Managers can describe how they would support a stressed staff member
• • Staff report managers are approachable and supportive
• • Poor management practice is addressed where identified

Evidence to check

• • EAP or equivalent support information is available
• • Staff know how to access support confidentially
• • Information is included in induction, staff areas or wellbeing communications
• • Usage themes or awareness are reviewed without breaching confidentiality

Evidence to check

• • Mental health support information is available to staff
• • Managers know how to respond to urgent wellbeing or crisis concerns
• • Staff are signposted to internal or external support where appropriate
• • Confidentiality and safeguarding are managed appropriately

Evidence to check

• • Mental Health First Aiders, wellbeing champions or awareness sessions are in place where applicable
• • Staff know who wellbeing champions or support contacts are
• • Mental health awareness is discussed in meetings or communications
• • Initiatives are reviewed for staff awareness and usefulness

Evidence to check

• • Staff know how to raise concerns formally and informally
• • Concerns are recorded, reviewed and acted on
• • Staff report they feel safe raising issues
• • Managers respond without blame or retaliation

Evidence to check

• • Whistleblowing policy is available and discussed with staff
• • Staff can explain how to whistleblow internally or externally
• • Leaders promote openness and speaking up
• • Whistleblowing concerns are handled confidentially and fairly

Evidence to check

• • Staff survey results are available
• • Results are analysed for themes such as morale, workload, leadership and culture
• • Action plans are created and shared with staff
• • Progress is reviewed and communicated

Evidence to check

• • Exit interview records are available where staff agree to participate
• • Reasons for leaving are analysed
• • Themes are reported to management or governance
• • Actions are taken where exits identify avoidable wellbeing or culture issues

Evidence to check

• • Sickness absence data is reviewed regularly
• • Patterns by team, shift, reason or role are considered
• • Stress, anxiety, injury and fatigue-related absence are monitored
• • Supportive interventions are offered before problems worsen

Evidence to check

• • Return-to-work records are completed promptly
• • Discussions include cause of absence, support needs and workplace factors
• • Actions or adjustments are recorded
• • Repeat absence triggers supportive review, not only absence management

Evidence to check

• • Adjustment discussions and agreements are recorded confidentially
• • Pregnancy and individual risk assessments are completed where required
• • Adjustments are reviewed for effectiveness
• • Staff are treated fairly and without discrimination

Evidence to check

• • Occupational health referral records are available where relevant
• • Recommendations are reviewed and actioned
• • Confidentiality is maintained
• • Work adjustments or phased returns are documented where needed

Evidence to check

• • Information about flu or other relevant vaccination is shared where applicable
• • Vaccination records are handled lawfully and confidentially where recorded
• • Risk assessments are completed where health status affects deployment during outbreaks
• • Staff are not pressured or discriminated against unlawfully

Evidence to check

• • Moving and handling risk assessments are current
• • Hoists, slings and transfer aids are available and suitable
• • Staffing levels allow safe handling
• • Manual handling injuries or near misses are reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Moving and handling training records are current
• • Competency checks or observations are completed
• • Unsafe practice is corrected through coaching or retraining
• • Staff know not to complete unsafe transfers without support

Evidence to check

• • Incident records include abuse or aggression towards staff
• • Risk assessments and care plans are updated after incidents
• • Staff are offered support and debrief
• • Preventative actions are taken to reduce recurrence

Evidence to check

• • Debrief records following serious incidents, resuscitation attempts, unexpected deaths, violence or safeguarding events
• • Staff emotional wellbeing is considered
• • Learning and support actions are recorded
• • Follow-up support is offered where needed

Evidence to check

• • Allegation or complaint processes are fair, confidential and documented
• • Staff are informed of support available
• • Suspension or restrictions are risk assessed and not punitive by default
• • Wellbeing support is offered during and after investigations

Evidence to check

• • Relevant policies are current and accessible
• • Staff know how to report bullying, harassment or discrimination
• • Leaders challenge inappropriate behaviour
• • Staff feedback suggests the workplace is respectful and inclusive

Evidence to check

• • Records show concerns are acknowledged and investigated
• • Outcomes and actions are documented
• • Affected staff are supported
• • Follow-up checks confirm behaviour has changed and no retaliation has occurred

Evidence to check

• • Leaders are visible, approachable and responsive
• • Staff can raise concerns or mistakes without fear
• • Team interactions are respectful during observation
• • Culture concerns are addressed through supervision, meetings and governance

Evidence to check

• • Recognition systems or informal appreciation are evident
• • Good practice is acknowledged across roles and shifts
• • Recognition is fair and not limited to the same staff
• • Staff feedback suggests recognition supports morale

Evidence to check

• • Compliments log is maintained
• • Positive feedback is shared in handovers, meetings or supervision
• • Resident confidentiality is respected when sharing feedback
• • Good practice themes are used for learning

Evidence to check

• • Team meeting minutes are available
• • Meetings include wellbeing, workload, learning and service improvement
• • Staff are invited to contribute
• • Actions from meetings are followed up

Evidence to check

• • Handover process is clear and consistent
• • Staff share key risks, changes and concerns respectfully
• • Handovers are not used to blame or criticise staff publicly
• • Staff report handovers help them feel prepared

Evidence to check

• • Suggestion records, meeting minutes or improvement logs include staff ideas
• • Staff receive feedback about suggestions
• • Ideas are tested or implemented where appropriate
• • Staff feel their views influence practice

Evidence to check

• • Training and CPD opportunities are available to day, night, bank and part-time staff
• • Access to qualifications or specialist learning is fair
• • Staff development needs are discussed in supervision
• • Barriers to learning, such as time or language, are considered

Evidence to check

• • Training matrix is current
• • Mandatory and role-specific gaps are identified
• • Staff are not allocated tasks before training is complete where this would be unsafe
• • Training gaps are reviewed alongside incidents and staff confidence

Evidence to check

• • Competency records are completed for medication, moving and handling, equipment, clinical tasks and specialist care where relevant
• • Managers know which staff are not yet signed off
• • Staff can refuse unsafe tasks without fear of blame
• • Competency gaps lead to support and supervision

Evidence to check

• • Supervision quality audits or manager reviews are completed
• • Staff feedback about management support is reviewed
• • Managers receive support or training where needed
• • Poor people management is addressed by senior leaders

Evidence to check

• • Agency and bank induction records are completed
• • Temporary staff receive resident-specific information and local procedures
• • Permanent staff are not left carrying unsafe additional workload due to unsupported agency staff
• • Agency performance and feedback are reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Short staffing incidents are recorded and escalated
• • Contingency actions are documented
• • Resident safety and staff wellbeing impact are reviewed
• • Repeated shortages trigger recruitment, rota or dependency review

Evidence to check

• • Allocations reflect resident dependency and staff competence
• • High-dependency work is not repeatedly placed on the same staff without support
• • Staff feedback about unfair workload is reviewed
• • Rota and allocation changes are made where imbalance is identified

Evidence to check

• • PPE, moving and handling equipment, IT devices and documentation tools are available and working
• • Staff report equipment faults or shortages are acted on
• • Lack of resources is not causing delays, stress or unsafe care
• • Resource issues are escalated through governance where repeated

Evidence to check

• • Staff have protected or realistic time for documentation
• • Documentation systems are reviewed for duplication or burden
• • Staff are not routinely completing records after unpaid time or excessive delay
• • Record quality and care quality are both considered

Evidence to check

• • Break areas are clean, suitable and accessible
• • Staff can access drinking water and food storage or meal arrangements
• • Staff are able to decompress during breaks
• • Facilities are suitable for night staff as well as day staff

Evidence to check

• • Uniform policy is clear and practical
• • Uniforms are suitable for care tasks and temperature conditions
• • Laundry or changing arrangements support hygiene
• • Staff feedback about uniform comfort or dignity is considered

Evidence to check

• • Supervision discusses emotional impact and professional boundaries
• • Staff receive support after resident deterioration, death or difficult family situations
• • Training covers boundaries, compassion fatigue and self-care
• • Managers respond when staff appear emotionally overwhelmed

Evidence to check

• • Managers monitor signs such as increased errors, withdrawal, irritability, sickness, lateness or reduced engagement
• • Concerns are addressed through supportive conversation
• • Support plans, adjustments or referrals are offered
• • Burnout indicators are reviewed at team and governance level

Evidence to check

• • Staff have safe routes to discuss ethical concerns
• • Supervision or reflective sessions include moral distress where relevant
• • Leaders respond to concerns about unsafe staffing, end-of-life care, restrictions or resource limits
• • Actions are taken where moral distress reflects real service pressures

Evidence to check

• • Risk register includes turnover, vacancies, stress absence, burnout, bullying or staffing instability where relevant
• • Risks are rated and reviewed regularly
• • Controls and actions are documented
• • Senior leaders monitor unresolved wellbeing risks

Evidence to check

• • Turnover, vacancy rate, time-to-hire and leaver reasons are monitored
• • Retention data is reviewed by role, team or shift where possible
• • Actions address causes such as workload, culture, pay, leadership or progression
• • Impact of retention actions is reviewed

Evidence to check

• • Pay and benefits are reviewed by leadership where possible
• • Rota flexibility requests are considered fairly
• • Staff feedback about pay, benefits and flexibility is reviewed
• • Decisions are transparent where improvements cannot be made

Evidence to check

• • Career pathway information is available
• • Staff discuss progression in supervision or appraisal
• • Mentoring, senior carer development or leadership opportunities are offered
• • Internal progression and retention are monitored

Evidence to check

• • Incident reporting culture is open and non-punitive
• • Near misses are reported and reviewed
• • Learning is shared without unnecessary blame
• • Staff feedback confirms they feel safe to report mistakes

Evidence to check

• • Professional registration checks are current where relevant
• • CPD, revalidation or supervision support is available
• • Staff have time and resources to meet professional requirements
• • Concerns about registration or practice are supported and escalated appropriately

Evidence to check

• • EDI policy and training are current
• • Staff feedback is reviewed for discrimination, exclusion or unfair treatment
• • Reasonable adjustments and cultural needs are respected
• • Discriminatory behaviour is challenged and investigated

Evidence to check

• • Wellbeing actions are linked to measurable indicators
• • Data includes sickness, turnover, survey scores, vacancies, incidents or staff feedback
• • Outcomes are reviewed after initiatives are introduced
• • Initiatives that do not work are adapted or stopped

Evidence to check

• • Wellbeing action plan is current
• • Actions are reviewed using staff feedback and data
• • New pressures such as outbreaks, staffing changes or increased dependency trigger review
• • Staff are informed about progress and changes

Evidence to check

• • Audit includes staff conversations, anonymous feedback or survey evidence
• • Audit reviews rota data, sickness, turnover, agency use, supervision and incident trends
• • Culture is observed through staff interactions, handovers and leadership visibility
• • Findings lead to practical support and measurable improvement

Evidence to check

• • Governance reports consider how staffing pressures affect resident care
• • Wellbeing risks are reviewed alongside incidents, complaints, call bell response, medication errors and care quality
• • Actions protect both staff wellbeing and resident outcomes
• • Leaders can evidence how supporting staff improves care quality