Ghyll Royd 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 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. 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.

Leaders had created a positive caring culture. Leaders had worked hard to ensure people received good care consistently and there was a culture of continuous learning.

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.

Leaders were skilled to ensure people received a good quality experience. Leaders worked with people and their relatives with a focus on wellbeing, accessing the community on the community bus and making the service feel welcoming. Poor care was challenged and learned from with a zero tolerance approach to closed cultures.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff felt able to speak up and felt they would be listened too. There was an open culture where staff would recommend the service as a good place to work and live. There was an “open door” policy where staff, people and relatives could speak with leaders.

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 were treated fairly. All staff told us leaders were supportive, flexible and approachable.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance but did not always lead to timely responses. Largely, audits were used to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support.

The provider had governance systems in place to monitor the quality of care and identify areas for improvement. However, these systems did not always result in timely action. For example, concerns about the quality and variety of food had been raised by people and relatives, but they did not feel improvements had been made quickly enough. One relative told us, “I hope this isn’t just for your (CQC) sake and this carries on after you’ve gone.” Whilst the provider took action during the assessment and developed an improvement plan, this demonstrated that governance processes were not always effective in driving prompt and sustained improvements.

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. Staff linked in with local community groups and resources to improve people’s wellbeing. Activities such as a summer fete, Wall of Hearts for COVID-19 reflection day, veteran friendly accreditation and working with a local school to facilitate work experience visits were positive ways of integrating the service with its local community.

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 provider worked with local organisations to explore innovative ways of working. For example, they had worked with a local university to explore ways of making texture-modified meals more appealing and recognisable for people with swallowing difficulties, with the aim of improving people's enjoyment of food and overall wellbeing.