Help at Home (Danbury Gardens)

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.

The provider and management team had clear strategies and goals to enable the service to meet the needs of the people they supported within the extra care housing complex of Danbury Gardens. These goals focused on the delivery of person-centred care. Policies and procedures were in place which reflected current best practice and guidance, along with workforce equality and diversity.

Staff told us people’s views were sought through the ‘voice of customer survey’, which took place every 3 months, providing an opportunity for people to comment upon and improve the service. A member of staff said, “One of the more common comments related to staff is a person requesting a change of carer, which is always facilitated.”

Care professional team meeting minutes included information and discussions around the vision and values of the provider, where staff were required to consider and reflect upon how their interactions reflected these. In addition to meetings, staff spoke about supervisions and appraisals. A member of staff said, “We do supervisions and appraisals, I am asked about my concerns, my work, I share my opinion on how my work and role is going. I feel listened to for this reason.”

The registered manager advised the values of the service were community, courage and heart. and that the provider looked to build a culture for both people who use the service and staff to work as a team, in the delivery of good quality care and outcomes.

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.

People and family members spoke positively of the registered manager and staff, which evidenced an inclusive service. A person told us, “[registered manager] is lovely and the small staff team all seem very nice too. They are a pleasure to be around and will do whatever they can for you, sometimes without me having to ask.” A family member told us, “The carers work well as a team and that only comes from good management.”

Staff spoke of the visibility and approachability of the management team. A member of staff told us, “The management team definitely know what they are doing with the service. I can go to them at any time with anything and they will listen, make a note of it and fix problems.”

The registered manger informed us they received regular visits and support from the regional manager. The stated they had undertaken the operational care staff induction programme and learning relevant to their role.

The provider and management team were experienced, knowledgeable and supportive of the delivery of high-quality care and modelled inclusive behaviours in their day to interactions. This was demonstrated by the regional manager who made themselves available to support the registered manager throughout the inspection. The registered manager was knowledgeable about issues and priorities that were required to deliver good quality care.

Policies and procedures outlined the provider’s commitment to quality care and culture of the organisation. There was ongoing monitoring of the service by the registered manager, focusing on culture and quality. This was facilitated by systems and processes which sought feedback from people, their families and staff, and through the provision of ongoing support for staff via supervision, meetings and opportunities to learn and develop.

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

Staff were fully aware of the provider’s whistle-blowing policy, and of their role in highlighting and reporting any concerns. A member of staff told us, “If I had a concern, I feel that I would be listened to and could report in confidence. I know about whistle blowing but hopefully will never need to do this. The policy is there and so are the contact details about who to report to, senior management, Leicester City Council and the Care Quality Commission.”

An event analysis was undertaken monthly that considered all events which occurred relating to the safety and quality of the service provided. Any lessons learnt from the analysis were shared amongst the staff team, where it related to people’s individual care, or within the care professional team meeting minutes for wider learning across all the provider’s services.

The registered manager operated an open-door policy and encouraged staff to speak with them in confidence. Staff were also made aware of external organisations who they could approach to share concerns.

The registered manager informed us any whistle-blowing concerns would be investigated by an appointed investigator in consultation with senior management. Any disclosures would be treated sensitively and confidentially.

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 and registered manager celebrated the diversity of the workforce recognising the value and importance of a diverse staff team. A member of staff told us, “I never feel like my culture and my religious needs are disrespected, it is the opposite. I have no difficulty getting time off when it comes to special religious celebrations.”

Staff were supported by flexible working arrangements. A member of staff told us, “I had a particular period when I needed a rota change for personal reasons. The manager listened and changed my staff pattern. I felt very supported by this.”

The providers policies and procedures reflected the importance of protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act, relating to all aspects of the service provided.

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’s systems and processes to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service ensured risks were identified and mitigated, enabling and empowering people to maintain their independence and attain a good quality and safe care. A person told us, “Living here and being looked after by Help at Home has given me a better quality of life.”

Staff had confidence in the governance of the service. A member of staff told us, “I think the governance is pretty good. I have confidence in how they run the business. The registered manager is very approachable, and I believe that they do things well and are on top of things.”

The provider had a policy and procedure outlining how the quality and safety of services would be monitored, through self-assessment, auditing and reporting. A quality standards framework for all services had been developed, which considered government legislation and the standards of quality and safety as set out by regulators. A quality team, in conjunction with the registered manager and senior managers were responsible for the implementation of the quality standards framework. An improvement plan was developed and monitored where improvements were noted.

The provider had a contingency plan which referenced the collaborative approach required between themselves and the company that provided the extra care service (Danbury Gardens), with a mutually agreed protocol with the housing provider, which laid out the site-specific joint working agreement. This provided assurance that both interested parties would work collaboratively in the event or an emergency, for example a flood or fire, to promote the safety and well-being of people.

The registered manager was knowledgeable as to their regulatory responsibilities and monitored the quality and safety of the service. This was achieved through a schedule of audits which reviewed and audited people’s care records, including care plans, medicine records and assessments. Staff records were also audited, focusing on supervision, appraisal, training and spot checks.

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 provider and registered manager worked collaboratively with external stakeholders and agencies, which included the local authority, extra care housing provider, health care professionals and the fire service, facilitating joined up care, promoting quality of care and safety.

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.

The provider and management team were committed to ongoing monitoring to measure the outcomes and impact of the service provided. Systems and processes were in place to learn from event when things went wrong. Planned improvements for the service included the introduction of electronic medicine and care records, so care interactions were recorded in real time, and would be accessible to staff who had authorised access.

The provider encouraged and celebrated success. The provider informed us they had an annual National Care Award, covering a range of areas, which included branch team member of the year, manager of the year, branch team and care team of the year. Other areas related to staff going above and beyond, which included changing lives award and lifetime achievement award. Nominations could be made by anyone and submitted to the awards panel. Regional winners were then considered for the national awards.

At a local level there was a scheme of the month award, specific to services who support people within an extra care housing scheme. Winners of awards were published on the provider’s ‘CCH Connect App’. The Connect App was also used to acknowledge staffs’ dedication, teamwork or specific achievements such as attaining a vocational qualification in care.

A member of staff told us, “We do have a carers award system, it is a nomination scheme, an email is sent o to the carer telling them they have been nominated and the carer’s name goes forward to the company’s national awards ceremony.”