Harry Priestley House

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 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 89 (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. The provider had a clear vision and set of values which focussed on being kind, supportive, trusted and caring. The registered manager led the service with these values in mind and members of staff delivered care and support in line with these values. The registered manager was in the process of supporting both the people who lived in Harry Priestley House and the staff team through organisation change and a period of uncertainty. To support this process, they had led and delivered a learning session which focussed on key priorities to ensure people remained at the heart of the service irrespective of wider organisational change.

The provider had exceptionally 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 always did so with integrity, openness and honesty. The registered manager led the service excellently and ensured the service’ focused on high quality and effective care for people. Relatives told us about how they found the registered manager to be supportive and approachable. One relative said, “The registered manager is approachable and they are very good. They are always there to talk to.” Another relative said, “I have confidence in the registered manager. The service is definitely well led. Everything is 100%.” Members of staff told us about how they were supported by the registered manager. One member of staff said, “I do feel supported by [the registered manager]. There have been many times I have spoken to them; this could be about my own wellbeing or my wellbeing at work and they have supported me. I have discussed things in my 1-1s and they have taken things on board and acted on them appropriately, confidentially and professionally. I do feel supported in my role.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Members of staff had access to whistle-blowing policies and they were supported and encouraged to speak up in meetings or supervision sessions.

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. We were not made aware of any concerns about discrimination within the service. There was a positive workplace culture where people were treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their background or personal characteristics.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver high-quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They always acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. There were clear governance processesin place in the service. The registered manager carried out regular walkarounds, reviews, audits and spot checks which ensured care and support was delivered insafely and effectively.The management team had implemented a large transformation project and introduced a new electronic care planning system. The new system improved quality outcomes for people by enabling members of staff to access real-time accurate, person-centred data which reduced errors and supported improved continuity of care. The management team created bespoke care plan and risk assessments templates which recognised the unique work of Harry Priestley House within the wider provider group; specifically care and support for people with a learning disability. The bespoke plans were set out in line with CQC’s Right support, right care, right culture guidance which ensured people’s goals and aspirations were achieved. These bespoke requirements were then carried through to the monthly and quarterly care plan audits and successful implementation has enabled the service to streamline administrative tasks, which meant members of staff have more time to directly engage with people.

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. There were good links with the local community and people engaged in local community activities including rambling and gardening. Networks and partnerships were in place with places of worship and local schools which enabled school children to visit the care home and for people to visit the school. The local management team worked in partnership with external stakeholders to ensure a multi-disciplinary team approach was always applied to discussions about people’s care and support. The collaborative approach to partnership working embraced at Harry Priestley House, ensured people’s voices, choices and personal goals fully supported their daily life experiences. The service worked together with partners to build a network which supported autonomy and dignity for people. For example, the specialist community nursing team and speech and language therapists supported the service in the implementation of the STOMP (Stopping Over Medication of People with a learning disability, autism, or both) framework. This partnership ensured psychotropic medications were not overused to manage behaviour, and people’s signs of physical pain were correctly identified and safely treated. Ongoing compliance with the STOMP framework was then monitored at both service and provider level. Feedback from community clinicians was positive. One professional told us, “Overall, my experience of working with the service has been very positive. Communication is consistently strong; the team are approachable, welcoming, and responsive, ensuring that information is shared promptly and effectively. Queries are addressed in a timely manner, which supports good partnership working. The service demonstrates a clear willingness to reflect and improve. Feedback is received openly, and staff actively seek advice and support where needed to enhance outcomes for the individuals in their care. This openness contributes to a transparent and collaborative approach across agencies and other professionals. In more complex or challenging situations, the management team show determination to achieve positive outcomes. They remain focused and solution-oriented, demonstrating a strong commitment to the wellbeing of their residents. Their dedication is evident in the way they work through difficulties and advocate for those they support. Staff are consistently helpful, approachable, and maintain an open and honest approach in their practice, which helps to build trust and confidence in the service.”

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 supported leadership and development for members of staff. The registered manager was focussed on learning and improvement. They were part of a network of registered managers who provided peer support to each other and new ideas to support continuous service improvement.