Hillcroft Nursing Home Morecambe

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 of this key question, 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 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 very clear shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and an exceptional understanding of the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

Staff had a well-developed understanding of equality, diversity and human rights, and they prioritised safe, high-quality, compassionate care. Leadership culture was seen to be very positive and proactive in driving the quality of service. Staff all felt valued by the provider telling us how accessible the senior management team was and that they visited the home regularly.

The provider had inclusive leaders who had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered manager and staff team were a very well-established team most having worked at the home for a lot of years. The management team had the appropriate skills and experience to lead effectively, understood the risks and priorities for the service and acted with openness and honesty during this inspection.

The staff team ensured people had equal access to opportunities to promote inclusivity. During this inspection the senior management team were very responsive to any concerns we raised and took immediate action to rectify them, improve and learn from them.

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

Regular meetings between the management team and staff took place. Staff were given opportunities to discuss performance via a supervision and appraisal process. Staff told us they could speak up about anything and were listened to and things were acted on. One staff member told us, “I can ask the registered manager about anything, and they will always do what they can about it.” Another said, “We can raise any concerns, when we did the senior management came in and sorted it.”

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.

A proportion of the staff team were from overseas, and the provider operated a sponsorship scheme. The staff we spoke with spoke very positively about their experiences of being recruited and working at the home. Staff told us they felt very valued and supported by management team.

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.

There were a range of quality monitoring and auditing processes in place. We discussed the auditing tools used for the safe management of medicines with the deputy manager and the provider’s nominated individual who told us further detailing in the auditing process would be adopted to ensure capturing the issues we found. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

We saw there were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability and these were used to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. The management team members were seen to be present frequently in the home and the delegation of responsibilities were clear for the day to day running and oversight of the service.

The service acted on the best information available about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

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.

Staff and management worked in close collaboration with partners to ensure people received good quality care and their needs were met. The home had developed good relationships in the local community with a variety of social groups.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The service encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcomes and quality of life for people. The registered manager and staff actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

Where lesson needed to be learned information was shared with the staff team so any improvements could be implemented. The provider demonstrated their drive for continual improvement and development in all aspects of this inspection showing a clear determination to ensure the home provided the best care possible.