Star Maris Healthcare Limited Also known as Star Maris Healthcare

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

Staff and leaders fostered a safe, inclusive and supportive environment where collaboration, listening, respect and personalised care were valued. This had a positive impact on people. Relatives told us they would recommend the service to others. Their comments included, “If I need to say something they listen to me and try to help” and “They know their job very well; their polices and rules.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care 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 had experience of working in health and social care. They were supported by a team of management colleagues who had clear roles and responsibilities. Relatives told us leaders were easily reachable and described them as helpful and experienced. Staff expressed positive views about the management team.

The provider fostered a positive culture where staff felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff understood their responsibility to report concerns and knew who to contact. They told us they felt comfortable speaking up and expressing their views and were listened to. Additionally, the registered manager ensured staff had regular opportunities to discuss matters, including through individual supervision and team meetings.

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. Leaders responded appropriately to staff needs and ensured staff had opportunities to discuss any issues. Staff reported they were treated fairly and enjoyed working at the service. Meeting records showed discussions around staff wellbeing, achievements and good practice, promoting a culture of encouragement and appreciation.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The registered manager conducted regular checks of the service, including the care provided to people, to assess quality, identify shortfalls and drive improvements. They were aware of their statutory and regulatory requirements. There was adequate management cover to ensure support was readily available to people, relatives and staff. Policies and procedures were up-to-date and service specific. Relatives and staff spoke positively about the management.

Following the assessment, the registered manager took action to strengthen governance arrangements for medicines management and address gaps in oversight.

The provider understood their duty to work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people.

Staff and leaders worked collaboratively with people, their relatives and relevant professionals. They shared information effectively and involved people and their relatives in care planning and decision-making. We reviewed numerous communication records between the service and social care teams, and with relatives, including invitations to care reviews and correspondence about people’s care. This demonstrated effective partnership working.

The provider focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation to improve people’s experiences, outcomes and quality of life.

There were processes in place to ensure that learning took place when things went wrong. The staff team regularly discussed how the service and the care provided to people could be improved. They sought feedback from people and their relatives, which they used to develop the service. The provider acknowledged our feedback and acted swiftly where improvements were needed. This demonstrated the provider’s commitment to making positive changes to the service.