Parry Healthcare Wiltshire

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 Requires Improvement. 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.

Staff were able to tell us about the providers vision and could explain the ethos the service promoted. One staff member told us, “We treat everyone with respect, and treat everyone fairly without discrimination”. This meant the provider had shared their vision effectively and staff were able to provide support to people in line with the providers values.

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.

We spoke to the Registered Manager who was clear about the vision of the service and had a strong knowledge of the people they supported. The registered Manager was passionate when they spoke about staff and how they could be supported to develop within their role.

Staff told us the manager was approachable and supportive. We were told, “I feel listened to” and “The manager is fair and approachable”. This meant staff had confidence in the Manager’s ability to lead effectively.

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

The provider had a policy and systems to support staff to speak up. Guidance was clearly available for staff and the registered Manger actively promoted and supported staff to speak up. Staff told us they felt able to speak up and that when they did they were listened to and actions were taken. This meant the provider promoted staff to speak up when needed.

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 had supported staff to make reasonable adjustments to their working patterns where needed to support them to remain at work. Staff informed us the provider was supportive in enabling them to manage their work patterns Comments included: “I travel by public transport and the registered manager ensures that my roster is accessible via my transport means”.

Staff told us they were treated as individuals by the provider. We were told “I feel this is a supportive place to work”. This meant that the provider promoted an inclusive and fair culture.

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.

We visited the provider on June 5 2025 to complete an assessment. During that assessment we found shortfalls in the governance of the service, we issued the provider with a warning notice in relation to this.

We revisited the provider again on January 12 2026 to see if these shortfalls had been addressed. During this assessment we found significant improvements had been made, and the service was no longer in breach of regulations.

During the previous inspection we found that visit times to people were often late The provider did not have systems to monitor, identify impact to people or address these shortfalls. During this assessment we saw the provider had implemented systems to address this. Action plans had been developed and learning had taken place. This resulted in a significant improvement of the timings of people’s visits. This meant people were receiving their support at agreed times most of the time and were happier with the service they received.

During the previous assessment we found shortfalls in recruitment records. Leaders had ensured a recruitment drive had taken place. Further, the registered Manager had ensured that all recruitment records were in line with legislation.

Risks to people had previously not been thoroughly assessed and mitigated. During this assessment we found improvements had been made to the details held within people’s risk records.

Policies were easily available to staff to enable them to access clear guidance. This meant staff were able to complete their role in line with good practice and legislation.

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.

We saw the provider had communicated with other professionals such as the local authority and healthcare professionals. The Registered Manager told us about the changing needs of a person had been identified. We saw the provider had gained additional support from the local speech and language therapy team to ensure a person’s needs had been assessed by trained care professionals. This meant that people were supported safely with their nutrition and hydration.

One relative explained that the Registered Manager had attended a meeting with the person and a healthcare professional. They told us, “We found that really helpful”. This meant people were supported to share their information with other services to ensure their needs were met.

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 registered manager told us how they had learnt from shortfalls in relation to timings of visits which we found during our previous assessment. We saw that actions had been taken to identify learning and address these shortfalls. For example, staff briefings were held in order to revisit expectations regarding timings. The records for these meetings evidenced the providers expectations and clear guidance for staff to follow. The provider had addressed shortfalls by developing systems to ensure that any delays such as road works were factored into the planning of people’s visits.

Where shortfalls had been identified by the provider, action plans had been developed which contained details of actions taken and lessons learnt. This meant the provider had focused on learning and driving improvements within the service.