Hempton Field 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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 75 (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 service had a positive culture, demonstrated by staff and leaders who were passionate and innovative in ensuring a shared vision and strategy for delivering high quality care. Staff told us how they enjoyed working at the service. One staff member said, “I genuinely love this job, it is such a nice environment. It’s like a family.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff consistently told us how they felt supported in their roles and how they found the manager approachable, open, and honest. Staff told us the communication systems and team working within the service were robust and effective. Staff also told us they had briefings and meetings to keep up to date. One staff member said, “We do have staff meetings. Our manager tries to arrange us at least one a month. Our manager also arranges carers only meetings. These are useful because in the whole staff meetings it gives everyone a chance to speak about what is going well in the whole home as well as if there is anything that needs to be improved or worked on in the home. The carer only meetings are also useful because it gives us as carers a chance to all speak together about our work and if there is anything we need to improve on which could include the care we give to the residents to improve the way we do our role.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Policies were in place to support this culture.

Regular meetings were held with staff, including supervision, handovers, and briefings. Staff told us they felt confident in speaking up to raise issues or concerns. One staff member said, “Yes, I would feel confident to speak out however, I have not had to do that whilst working at Hempton Fields.” Another staff member told us, “I feel confident in speaking out. I have done this in the past many years ago and the concerns that I raised had action taken.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The manager demonstrated how they valued staff by working closely with them to understand staff’s individual needs and by making reasonable adjustments to accommodate and support them in their work.Staff told us where adjustments were made to their working week to support them.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Systems were in place to monitor and improve the service. These systems flagged concerns such as missed medicines, accidents and incidents. For example, monthly falls analysis was conducted and resulted in actions being taken to reduce falls. These actions included, reviewing staff deployment during identified high risk periods, continued referrals to GPs and other healthcare professionals and medicine reviews for people on high-risk medicine. Records confirmed the management of falls was effective.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The provider had built links with community services and healthcare services such as GPs, physiotherapist, dentist, podiatrist and optician, as needed.

Staff spoke about partnership working. One said, “We have good communication with other health care professionals outside of our home. This includes our GP and the district nurse.”

The local authority told us, “We have no current concerns with this service.”

The service supported people to access the local community. People were taken into the local area to visit places of interest, an activities centre and local pubs. The home used its own minibus to transport people to these activity events.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The service documented learning within incidents and accidents and took direct action to support people and keep them safe. Staff felt they received feedback about incidents in a timely manner.

Comments from residents’ meetings and surveys were used to improve the service. For example, following people’s requests, menus were regularly updated to reflect people’s preferences.

A ‘you said, we did’ scheme was in place and recorded people’s requests and actions taken. For example, one person had requested that the pond should be cleaned so they could enjoy the fish. We saw this had been actioned and the pond was clean.