The Old Rectory

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 inspection we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this inspection 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. The service was no longer in breach of regulation relating to good governance.

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. The provider had shared their values statement with people, setting out what they should expect from the service. Staff told us the registered manager demonstrated the provider’s values in the way they worked. The values and how they were applied was discussed in staff meetings and staff appraisals.

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 service had a manager in post who was registered with Care Quality Commission. The registered manager held a level 5 management qualification, and other members of the management team were being supported to complete management qualifications. Staff told us the management team were knowledgeable and provided them with the support they needed to do their job well. Comments from staff included, “It is very good management. They see what we are doing and work with us. We have a rapport, and I feel free to speak to them” and “It is well-led. There is always someone you can bounce ideas off.”

Visiting professionals were positive about the management of the service, with comments including “The [deputy] manager is great and always communicates promptly and politely. She is always striving to make the best decisions for [people] as far as I can tell.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The service had speaking up procedures which staff were able to access if they needed. Details were shared with staff during their induction, staff meetings and supervision sessions. Staff told us they knew how to raise any concerns and were confident managers would listen to them and respond.

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 processes for staff to request flexibility in their work patterns, for example to enable staff with caring responsibilities or those with health conditions to remain working. Staff were aware of these processes and told us they felt supported by the 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.

At the last inspection we found shortfalls in the way governance systems identified areas for improvement and ensured these improvements were made. At this inspection we found this had improved. The management team completed a range of audits, surveys and observations of staff practice to monitor the quality of the service. The registered manager had monthly governance meetings to review the findings and report on actions to the provider’s senior management team. These systems demonstrated shortfalls were identified and actions taken to make improvements where needed.

Visiting professionals were positive about the governance systems in the service, with one commenting, “The service actively collaborates within the Priory network, sharing learning through governance meetings. The registered manager demonstrates strong leadership and commitment to partnership working.”

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 registered manager told us they worked in close collaboration with a range of professionals to help make sure people received continuity in their care. Examples included establishing a key contact in the GP practice to help ensure requests are actioned in a timely way so people could access the services they need. Staff had also worked with hospital teams to support a person during time as an in-patient.

Professionals gave positive feedback about working in partnership with the service to meet people’s needs. Comments included, “The provider works closely with the Adults Commissioning Team by maintaining open and responsive communication. They respond promptly to emails, provide requested information without delay, and actively engage in discussions when needed. This collaborative approach ensures that any issues are addressed quickly and that services remain aligned with commissioning requirements.”

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. Systems for monitoring standards of support people received were used to identify areas of improvement and ensure lessons were learned when needed. This included regular audits and quality assurance checks. The registered manager took part in peer reviews of other services run by the provider, which was used as an opportunity to share learning and improve the service.