High 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 newly registered 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 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.
Shared direction and a positive culture were embedded throughout the service. The registered manager regularly communicated with staff through memos, team meetings, and training sessions. During these, feedback from people using the service was summarised, the quality of care was reviewed, and discussions took place on ways to improve practice or reinforce good practice across the team.
This approach ensured staff were aware of the service’s values, priorities, and expectations, and it encouraged a culture of continuous learning and improvement. Staff reported these opportunities helped them feel informed, supported, and aligned with the service’s goals, contributing to a consistent and person-centred approach to care. During conversations, staff displayed the provider’s values and demonstrated a positive culture focused on person-centred, compassionate care.
The recruitment and interview process ensured candidates were selected if they demonstrated alignment with the service’s values and vision.
 

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 held regular meetings with both the care staff team and the wider management team, demonstrating a strong focus on staff wellbeing. During these meetings, new strategies were discussed and implemented to support staff, including initiatives tailored to seasonal challenges and awareness, showing a proactive approach to promoting a positive working environment.
Staff reported the registered manager was caring, kind, and highly supportive, describing them as passionate and equally committed to the wellbeing of staff as they were to the people using the service. This compassionate leadership helped create a culture where staff felt valued, supported, and motivated to deliver high-quality, person-centred care.
People and relatives told us they felt the service was, well organised and led describing the registered manager as “an excellent manager who is really committed to the service, nothing is too much trouble.” Other comments from people included, “I must admit the company are brilliant” and “I am glad to be able to give feedback on this company, they are focused on the service they provide, and I have no complaints or concerns. I would recommend them.”
 

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.
Staff were aware of the Freedom to Speak Up policy, and the whistleblowing policy was embedded within staff meetings, memos, and supervisions. The principles of speaking up were included in both the interview and induction processes, helping new staff understand how to raise concerns safely from the start.
Staff reported they felt confident raising concerns or highlighting issues, knowing their feedback would be listened to and acted upon. Regular reinforcement of these policies helped create a culture of openness, transparency, and accountability across the service, supporting both staff wellbeing and safe, high-quality care for people.
 

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 recruitment process was fair and equitable for all staff who applied for a role. Equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) health questionnaires were embedded into the recruitment process to identify anyone who may need reasonable adjustments at work. From the staff files reviewed, no staff required adjustments or additional support.
Staff reported they were treated fairly and had never experienced, nor witnessed, discrimination towards colleagues. An EDI policy was in place and followed, supporting a culture of fairness, respect, and inclusivity across the workforce.
 

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.
The provider had several effective systems in place to monitor and support improvements. These included call monitoring, regular reviews of people’s needs, analysis of falls, staff file reviews, and oversight of training, competencies, spot checks, and supervisions. These processes supported quality and safety and demonstrated a clear commitment to maintaining high standards.
Some areas of documentation could be further developed to enhance overall oversight. Care plan audits were limited, as visit schedules were in place rather than full consistent care plans. Medication audits were based on administration lists, as official medication records were not routinely used. As a result, audits did not fully capture whether time-specific medications were always administered according to plan. Improving these areas would align with the requirements and expectations set out in the providers medication policy.
The registered manager maintained overall responsibility for governance and demonstrated awareness of these areas. Enhancing documentation and audit processes would support more comprehensive oversight, further strengthen the consistency and quality of care, and build on the existing commitment to continuous improvement within the service.
The provider was responsive to the feedback from this assessment and had already taken steps to address the areas identified for improvement.
 

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 clear evidence of effective partnership working between the service and other professionals. Professional visit logs were maintained, showing involvement with external services and when staff reached out for support and guidance to ensure safe care and treatment for people.
We saw this with referrals and contact made to the falls team, occupational therapists, district nurse hub, and the local authority safeguarding team. These professionals provided guidance, support, and training, helping staff deliver safe, effective, and well-informed care.
 

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 service demonstrated a strong commitment to learning and innovation. Feedback from people, relatives, and staff was actively reviewed and used to drive improvements in practice. Staff meetings, training sessions, and supervision were used to share learning and embed good practice. The registered manager encouraged reflection on care delivery and implemented strategies to improve both staff wellbeing and the quality of care.
There was evidence of collaboration with external professionals, supporting shared learning and ensuring timely, safe care. While some gaps in formal documentation were identified, the service maintained a culture of reviewing outcomes, learning from feedback, and seeking opportunities to enhance care and support for people.