Gray Healthcare

The clients we spoke to told us that their overall experience of the service and the managers employed to look after them and their staff team was positive. One client told us that the manager for his care often visited him, and they were a positive factor.



Staff told us that managers did visit them whilst on duty with their clients, some felt it could happen more often, but generally all comments were positive regarding managers.



Staff told us that a lot of the locality managers had been support workers in recent years, and that this promotion from within was encouraged at the service.



Commissioners we spoke to did not raise any issues relating to the standard of management, other than to be positive.



Data supplied by the service showed that in the month of December 2024 there had been 31 visits to service homes by community support managers, as well as 12 spot check visits by senior managers.



There were team meeting records for each client, with a set agenda including safeguarding (including a collaborative reading of the safeguarding plan for the client ensuring all present knew the plan), team focus (what further training or wellbeing was required), and client improvements (achievements, highlights, areas for discussion).



We saw evidence of audits being completed and presented regularly in meetings, with full discussion of salient points and actions taken to ensure that any shortfall was dealt with.



Clients we spoke to were positive about their ability and right to air opinions or grievances they may have with the service.



The freedom to speak up guardian at the service was the head of human resources (as outlined in section 5.2 of the whistleblowing policy), although some staff were not sure who it was (the policy had only recently been updated with the specific role information), and there were policies and procedures that gave staff avenues to make their voices heard.



The service issued an employee handbook, a bound publication that outlined a comprehensive package of terms and conditions of service that included all aspects of the expectations of the service and also what the employee could expect.



Commissioners we spoke to raised no concerns regarding governance, management, and sustainability, although they did raise concerns about the turnover of locality managers for their clients.



Audits were in place to monitor records, and these were discussed in regular meetings that involved staff at all levels, ensuring that information was widely disseminated.



There was a comprehensive clinical procedures policy that had been updated in October 2024, outlining the requirements for each role in the recording and action of clinical procedures. Responsibilities for each role were explained in detail.



The service had an assessment and care planning schedule that definitively laid out the care plan, health and safety and operational assessments minimal review requirements, who would conduct the review and where on the computer system could the results be found. Care records that we reviewed showed that auditing was taking place regularly.



In view of the diverse client group that were supported by the service, there was a comprehensive autism and learning disability policy. The policy outlined the training and application of good practice when supporting clients with autistic or learning disabilities.