Heyberry House

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.

Staff enjoyed working at Heyberry House and told us they were committed to providing good care. One staff member told us, “The staff work really well as a team and support one another.”

There had been several manager changes in recent months which had created a period of inconsistency and uncertainty within the staff team. Staff spoke positively about the new manager, who had recently transferred from another care home operated by the provider. One staff member said, “[The manager] seems really nice. They know what they are doing.”

Although the home had been through this period of change, family members did not feel this had impacted on their loved one’s care or the culture within the service. Comments included, “Although there has been a turnover in managers, the care has been consistent” and “I just feel the culture is really good and right.”

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.

Family members told us they felt the service was well led. A family member commented, “From what I can see the service seems to be run well.”

Staff felt well supported. Comment included, “I do feel supported There has been a lot of change with management. We hope [The manager] is going to stay. They do seem to listen to us. They are very approachable” and “I do like [The manager]. I find them supportive so far.”

The registered manager had a clear understanding of duty of candour. Duty of candour is a general duty to be open and transparent with people receiving care when things have gone wrong.

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

Systems were in place to ensure people who spoke up were supported and protected. Staff told us they were confident and concerns would be treated seriously, and they felt they would be protected. Staff were also aware how to access the providers polices. One staff member told us, “We have a whistleblowing policy which is available to staff on notice boards.”

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 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. Policies were in place to support this, and staff told us they felt valued. One staff member described their personal situation and told us the provider kept in regular contact with them throughout the period. They commented, “This made me feel so valued, supported and included.”

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. Changes in managers meant some audits had not always picked up on the shortfalls within care plans and some medicines records we identified. We also found that whilst health and safety records and certificates were in place, they were not all initially easy to locate. The manager told us they were aware some improvements were needed and were working quickly to address any shortfalls. The provider had also arranged for their internal auditing team to undertake a review of Heyberry House, and this was already underway at the time of our assessment.

We were fully assured no harm had occurred to people from any shortfalls and we found an open, honest and transparent culture within the staff and management team who demonstrated a genuine commitment to rectify any shortfalls and improve the quality of the records within Heyberry House.

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.

Information within care plans demonstrated staff worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people’s needs were met. One professional told us, “People are well looked after, staff are lovely. They will always follow our guidance or instruction.”

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.

Staff were able to contribute their views through regular team meetings and supervision. One staff told us, “I have supervision every 6-8 weeks and an appraisal is annually. I feel very supported by [The manager] even know they are new in post. [The manager] always asks for my feedback and includes me in everything.”

The provider sought the views of people and family members through planned meetings, surveys and direct conversations. Records were maintained of any actions taken in response to feedback they received. Staff told us about changes and initiatives which had been put in place. One staff said, “We always send out surveys and do a ‘You said We did’ board. From this we got a fish tank and the sensory garden.”The sensory garden was a peaceful place for people to sit in private or come together and reflect.

Several staff were designated champions of keys areas of quality, for example veterans, dementia and dignity. This ensured a focus on important areas and champions shared learning across the team.