Leahyrst 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 requires improvement. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance at the service.

This service scored 57 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Some staff had not received regular supervisions, in line with the providers own policy. However, staff told us they felt supported in their roles and managers listened to them. A staff member said, “The managers are good, you can go to them if you have a problem, I can also contact head office. This is one of the better homes I have worked in. Everyone is friendly.” Staff were involved in regular meetings, where key information was shared and staff could raise suggestions.

We could not be assured the leadership within the service was effective in carrying out their roles and had effective oversight, due to the concerns we found during our assessment. The registered manager was responsible for overseeing another care service, and this meant they were not always present. This in turn, affected their auditing and monitoring of the home. Improvements were also required to daily manager walk rounds, to ensure it could be evidenced who had been spoken with and to ensure they could identify concerns we found. The management team felt supported by the provider and met with them regularly, to inform them what was happening at the service and any concerns.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. People, relatives and staff felt able to speak up and told us they felt listened to. They told us any concerns which were raised would be actioned and resolved. A person told us, "The manager is [name]. They are very friendly and a good manager. They are right approachable. Once you tell them how you like your cup of tea, they remember, and it is nice. We can air our problems to the manager, and they sort things out." There were clear whistleblowing and complaints procedures, and people and staff understood them. A staff member said, “Managers are really good, and supportive. Anytime I have asked a question they have been supportive and given me time to explain things.”

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. Staff told us they were happy at work and were 'like one big family'. Staff felt the registered manager was fair and approachable, and no staff had been subject to any form of discrimination. The service provided opportunities for students and offered placements to provide them with learning opportunities.

The provider did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. Audit systems were not effective in identifying concerns we found during our assessment, in relation to safe care, records, medicines, environmental risks and infection control practices. There was also a lack of monitoring in place, to ensure accidents and incidents were reviewed, and action taken to learn lessons from these.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. We found several compliments made about the service, such as 'Staff made us feel at ease', 'Gave relative lots of kindness and consideration, excellent care' and 'Thanks so much for your kindness and for caring.' We received positive feedback from partners who worked with the service, they told us care was good. A professional said, “I have observed people being treated in a respectful and caring manner. There were lots of person-centred interactions.” People were provided with opportunities to access the community, and friends and family were encouraged to visit and were welcomed by the home.

Some improvements were required, to ensure the management team were identifying where improvements were required, such as care records and managing medicines. Whilst it was identified that refurbishments were required, and some redecoration had commenced, several areas of the service required refurbishments at the time of our assessment. Relatives and staff were provided with feedback surveys, which were currently being reviewed. These surveys were mostly positive about the service. People had not received these surveys at the time of our assessment, however the management team planned to send these out to people. Quality improvement action plans were in place. The registered manager was open and honest throughout our assessment and was keen to make the improvements required.