HF Trust - Phillippines Close

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 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.

In the providers last staff survey, staff had said they were given clear expectations and were proud and motivated to work for the provider. This sentiment was reflected by the staff at Phillippines Close. Staff said they were proud to work for the service and motivated to support the people in their care. They understood the aims of the service were to support people to lead the best lives they could.

Changes had been made to the deployment of the staff team to help ensure consistent practice and culture across the service. Staff now supported people in both houses and joined together for team meetings. Staff felt supported by the management team and that there was clear communication with one another and at handovers. There was a balance between identifying areas for improvement and staff praise for care and support.

Relatives described the service as having a positive environment. One relative told us, “They treat him with privacy, dignity and respect. There’s most definitely a very strong sense of that there”; and “It’s had its ups and downs but it’s heading in the right direction now. Definitely."

The provider had leaders who embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had not registered with the CQC to ensure they were fit and had the skills and knowledge to lead effectively.

There was a manager in post, but they were absent at the time of the assessment. A service manager and deputy service manager were managing the service in their absence. The service had not had a manager who was registered with CQC for 6 months. It is a condition of the service’s registration that the manager is registered with CQC to ensure they are fit to run a social care service and to legally hold responsibility for the day-to-day operations.

Staff were positive about the support they received from the management team. This consisted of the service manager, deputy manager and deputy service manager. The deputy manager had worked at the service for a long period of time and therefore knew staff and people well. Staff told us that the management team led by example, supporting people in a practical way. Staff described the management team as ‘hands on’ and ‘ always helping out’ when they were at the service. We observed the service managers had taken time to get to know people and their communication needs.

The service managers were responsible for the oversight of this service and also a number of the providers other services. They divided their time between this service and the other services for which they were responsible. They were committed to their role and were supported by the deputy manager and regional manager. Relatives gave positive feedback about the management team. One relative said, “I’m very happy with the way it is now, compared to 6 months ago…There’s a new manager. I have great hopes with her.” Another relative told us, “I know the manager. She’s really nice and has been very responsive."

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

Staff told us they were encouraged to attend and contribute to staff meetings. These took place regularly and evidence that staff were able to share their views. Staff knew how to raise concerns with the provider or outside the organisation. Staff understood whistle-blowing and felt confident to do this if 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.

Staff spoke positively about their experiences at work and told us they were treated fairly. In the last staff survey staff had feedback that the organisation valued diversity. Staff were asked if they required any reasonable adjustments which were then put into practice. Staff had been trained in equality and diversity and this was discussed in supervision and team meetings. During staff induction it was ensured that staff were aware of people’s protected characteristics.

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 a programme of internal audits to help identify any shortfalls in the service and to monitoring the quality of service provision. This included health and safety, medicines and care plans and staff training. Where shortfalls had been identified in some of the providers’ other services, these had been brought together in an integrated action plan. The integrated action plan brought together identified actions from all parts of the service that were stored separately, so it is easier to priories them. The service manager was working through this action plan to ensure it was completed in a timely manner. For example, with regards to minimising the risk of people vulnerable to constipation, appropriate records had been completed and spot checked to ensure this staff practice had been embedded.

In addition, the provider’s quality team had recently visited the service. The service manager told us no immediate actions had been recommended but were awaiting the full report so any shortfalls could be added to the integrated action plan. We found there was limited recorded information that people had taken part in activities in and outside the home and the service manager added this to their action plan.

Services providing health and social care to people are required to inform the CQC of important events that happen in the service. This is so we can check that appropriate action has been taken. The provider had appropriately informed us of events and incidents.

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 service was set on the same site as the providers day service and a number of other houses where people with a learning disability were supported by the provider. Some people attended the day centre and met their neighbours whilst participating in activities. People were also supported to go for a walk around the local area. A relative said about their family member, “She’s grown up here and when staff take her for a walk, they say so many people know her.”

Relatives gave positive feedback about a community event that was organised. A relative told us, “They had a family barbeque with live music, and I took my grandchildren. All the staff were amazing and people and their families from other sites came. There was even an ice cream van.” There had been a positive outcome from the mixing of people who lived in different areas. Two people had become friends and had started to write to one another as pen pals. Victory in Europe day had also been celebrated with a party and quiz.

The service had partnerships with professionals from the local authority and health teams. They worked with members of the community learning disability team to help desensitise a person who needed to attend a specific medical appointment. Staff contributed their knowledge about the person’s likes and dislikes which ensured the medical appointment was less distressing.

The provider focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged the delivery of equality of experience and quality of life for people.

There was a positive culture where staff and managers understood the importance of learning lessons and making improvements. The provider had shared learning and best practice from their other services and put this into practice. The service’s action plan for improvement had been shared with staff at staff meetings so the whole team understood any changes needed and the reasoning for them. The programme of audits and checks helped to ensure ongoing improvement.

The views of people and their relatives were sought through keyworker meetings, house meetings and family forums. There was oversight of any complaints, incidents or compliments to identify what was going well with the service and where there was room for improvement.