Highgrove

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 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 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. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable, and supportive, enabling staff to develop confidently in their roles. Staff reported feeling able to share feedback and overall felt they were treated fairly. The service had a positive atmosphere and culture that prioritised effective care and support for people. Managers and staff told us their goal was to provide the highest quality, person‑centred care possible. Leaders demonstrated a strong understanding of their regulatory responsibilities and the key priorities for further developing the service. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and although a few felt that some ideas were not always acted upon, most said they felt able to make suggestions and were involved in decisions about the service. One staff member shared, “I have made suggestions and I have always been listened to, and I do get feedback.”

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 and senior team were visible within the service, leading by example and demonstrating inclusive behaviours. Systems and processes were in place to ensure staff received appropriate support. Staff were supported through supervisions and regular meetings where they could discuss how the service was running and share their ideas. Staff told us that, overall, the management team was approachable, and they felt comfortable raising concerns or seeking advice. They also reported feeling well supported by their managers. One staff member said, “The management team are approachable, supportive, and there’s an open‑door policy in place.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider had an up‑to‑date whistleblowing policy that was regularly reviewed. Staff were able to clearly explain the steps they would take if they needed to raise concerns. One staff member told us, “Yes, I can talk to my manager. They have an open‑door policy.” Systems were in place to ensure people could speak up and have their voices heard. One person told us, “The manager is easy to talk to, and all the staff are open and friendly.”

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 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 policies and procedures in place relating to equality, diversity, and inclusion, and staff had received training in these areas. The provider actively promoted a workplace culture that valued equality, diversity, and inclusion. Staff well‑being was discussed during supervision sessions, and additional processes were in place to offer support and gather feedback.

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. The provider had effective structures in place to monitor and improve the quality of care being delivered. Quality assurance processes, including audits of care plans, environmental risk assessments and staff competency checks, were used to assess safety and care standards. We asked the provider to further review these systems to ensure they reflected the areas we identified. Audits and governance systems, such as the review and analysis of accidents and incidents, helped the service maintain an accurate and up‑to‑date understanding of risks affecting safety and quality. The registered manager understood their responsibilities for making required notifications, such as informing CQC and raising safeguarding alerts. The provider also had a business continuity plan outlining how the service would respond in the event of an emergency.

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. The senior team demonstrated a strong commitment to continually improving the service and were open to suggestions, recognising the value of collaborative working with partner agencies. Records showed positive working relationships with external professionals, with advice being sought and referrals made promptly to support continuity of care. Feedback from partners was consistently positive. One professional told us, “They are responsive, easy to engage with and I have a good relationship with the management, unit leads and the care staff.”

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 provider had effective systems in place to promote a culture of continuous learning, reflection, and improvement. The senior leadership team demonstrated a proactive approach to governance and quality assurance, responding promptly to any issues we identified and taking immediate action to strengthen the safety and quality of the service. There were clear processes for reviewing accidents, incidents, safeguarding concerns, complaints, and situations where care had not gone as expected. Learning from these events was analysed, shared with staff, and used to inform ongoing improvements. Staff were encouraged to develop their skills, and the service supported their involvement in training as well as research initiatives to embed and promote best practice.