Bricklehampton Hall

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 inadequate. 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 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 registered manager and all staff had a good understanding of their roles and shared a commitment to providing person centred care and treating and valuing people as individuals. The provider and staff worked with people and their relatives to build a culture which focused on providing person centred and responsive care. A range of policies were in place to guide staff.

People, relatives, staff and external professionals felt the service was well run. People felt valued, listened to and included. Relatives explained they felt communication was very good and the management were very approachable. A person’s relative told us, “[Registered manager] is very approachable.”

Professionals gave positive feedback about the service. A professional told us, “Bricklehampton Hall is a home that I am always happy to visit, it has a calm welcoming atmosphere, and I have never seen anything that would cause me to raise concerns.”

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.

The registered manager and deputy were respected and liked by people, relatives and staff. All the people and relatives we spoke with knew who the manager was and knew who to speak to if they had concerns. A person’s relative told us, “There is good communication. We love the new manager. From our view, she’s doing a great job.”

Staff spoke well of the management team and told us they felt supported in their roles. A member of staff said, “They are supportive. They would listen to me; I can tell them anything about my concerns. We can speak to the higher management as well.”

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

There was a culture of openness where staff, people and relatives felt able to speak up. Opportunities were given to all people to share views openly across the service. Staff attended regular meetings to discuss the care, share best practice and give their opinions on how they could improve. A member of staff told us, “If I have any concern I feel free to report it.”

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.

There was evidence of a respectful and inclusive working environment, where staff felt valued and supported in their roles. There was clear evidence of positive working relationships, effective teamwork, and a management team that listened to and responded to staff needs. An Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) policy was in place, and staff had completed relevant equality and diversity training.

The provider supported staff through training, supervision, regular staff meetings and day-to-day management oversight, helping to ensure staff were equipped to meet the diverse needs of people using the service. Leaders promoted fairness and consistency in how staff were treated, with clear expectations around behaviours and practice that reflected the values of dignity, respect and inclusion.

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.

Governance systems supported clear oversight of risk. Accidents and incidents were reviewed through regular clinical meetings and quality reports, where trends and patterns were analysed, and learning was shared with the staff team to reduce recurrence. Monthly and quarterly quality assurance processes further demonstrated monitoring and review of performance, with evidence of actions taken following findings.

Systems had been developed and established to drive the necessary improvements since the last inspection. This resulted in improvement of the service which was noticed by people’s relatives, staff and external healthcare professionals.

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.

There was strong evidence of effective partnership working with external healthcare professionals, including GPs, community nursing teams, therapists and specialist services. Recommendations from these partners were consistently implemented, monitored and incorporated into care planning, supporting coordinated and responsive care. A healthcare professional told us, “I find that the nurses have a good knowledge of the residents and their problems with regard to medication and if the resident has capacity, I can then go and visit them to see if they have any concerns. The nurses are always aware of my visit date so that family members could be present for the medication review if they wished.”

The registered manager valued links with local community and was planning a summer event where local community would be welcome to join with residents and their relatives.

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 remained open and transparent throughout the inspection process, and both the registered manager and leadership team showed a strong willingness to respond to and learn from any concerns identified.

Systems for monitoring the standards of care and support people received were used effectively to identify areas for improvement and ensure lessons were learned when required. These included regular audits and quality assurance checks.

There was a shared vision of ongoing development within the service, driven by the registered manager, with staff speaking positively about changes and improvements which had been introduced. The provider demonstrated responsiveness to our previous inspection report, taking action to address issues such as environmental risks and oversight of accidents and incidents.