Yorkshire and Humber Healthcare Alliance (West)

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first inspection for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

Staff understood that compassionate care was key to the service’s success, and conducted themselves in line with the provider’s ethos and values. They were supported with training and supervision from the outset and clearly understood the expectations of the provider, and of people who used the service. Every person we spoke with who used the service said they would recommend the service to others.

The registered manager ensured people understood the service’s values when they considered using the service. They were open and accountable. One external professional said, “We haven’t received any negative feedback from individuals who receive care, or from our social work colleagues of health partners - they are consistent in care delivery.”

Policies and procedures held regard to equality and human rights, equity of care experiences, diversity and inclusion and the needs of people and their relatives.

Leaders had a good understanding of the barriers and challenges facing staff and social care more generally. They worked well with provider forums and other leaders in the wider organisation to learn lessons and increase efficiencies.

Leaders were also approachable and understood the personal impacts on people who used the service. One relative summarized, “The carers are delivering good care and it is perfect for my relative.” Another said, “We had a little issue with the timings of calls – spoke with the office and it was sorted to everyone’s satisfaction within 24 hours.”

The registered manager and quality assurance lead were passionate about the service they provided and wanted to continually improve. They ensured policies and procedures supported a compassionate approach to care.

The provider had policies and systems in place to support people, relatives and staff to speak up if they needed. When there had been a mistake the registered manager apologised and accepted accountability. They acted openly.

We contacted a range of staff and all felt they could raise issues if they needed to. They had access to external agencies and stakeholders, should they feel the service could not deal with their concerns appropriately.

The registered manager valued and respected the diversity of their workforce. They understood the need to ensure people’s and staff member’s backgrounds, cultures and individualities were well understood.

Leaders took steps to ensure the workplace was free from bullying and harassment. They continually reviewed the culture and training arrangements to support staff in an equitable way.

There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements in place. Staff understand their role and responsibilities. Leaders used real-time information and monthly checks and audits to account for the actions and performance of staff.

When governance systems identified the need for improvement, the registered manager made changes. For instance, recognising there had not been enough face to face competence checks with staff and ensuring more took place.

Data and notifications were shared with external partners, including CQC, as required. The provider had successfully implemented an electronic care records system and was utilising a range of benefits from this, including easier medicines stock checks and more involvement of people’s relatives.

People and relatives were happy with how leaders engaged with other services when required, for instance social workers or health workers.

The registered manager and quality improvement lead were open to advice and support. They proactively engaged with local forums and national conferences to gather and shared good practice. This helped ensure care packages were safe, up to date and well informed.

Feedback from external professionals was limited given the service was relatively small, but no concerns were raised. Partners felt leaders at the service were responsive and communicated well.

There was a consistent approach to measuring outcomes and impacts on a day-to-day basis, using the provider’s electronic care records system, and clearly set out auditing processes.

When one incident occurred, the provider had not fully analysed the incident to come to clear conclusions and to put in place clear enough learning. They were responsive to our feedback regarding this.

The service had some good external relationships in place and hoped to build on these as the service developed.

There was a service improvement plan in place to develop staff over time and to ensure the service had the resilience needed to grow.