Himley Manor Care Home

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 requires improvement. At this assessment 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.

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.

Staff and people told us there was an inclusive and supportive environment which promoted dignity, respect, equality and safety. The service culture reflected openness, kindness and commitment to supporting people to live their best lives. Communication between people, staff and management was open, which supported transparency and trust.

Staff spoke highly of the deputy manager and described their leadership as supportive and approachable. Staff were positive about how leaders engaged the team in supporting people and ensuring care reflected individual needs and preferences. One staff member told us, “We have a good working environment where staff work and help each other.”

Leaders worked closely with people, their representatives and staff to maintain a shared direction and support continuous learning and improvement. The deputy manager described being proud of how staff promoted the service’s values in everyday practice, and feedback from people and staff supported this.

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.

At the time of the assessment, there was not a registered manager in post. However, the deputy manager demonstrated the skills, experience and commitment needed to lead the service effectively. The deputy manager was knowledgeable about people’s needs and the day‑to‑day running of the home and showed a clear focus on delivering safe, high‑quality care. Staff told us they had trust and confidence in the deputy manager and described them as committed, responsive and supportive.

The deputy manager led with openness and integrity and operated an open‑door approach. They were visible and actively involved in the service, engaging directly with people and staff throughout the day. The deputy manager had implemented positive changes to systems and processes to strengthen safety and care delivery. We observed the deputy manager leading by example, modelling compassionate and inclusive behaviours, and promoting positive relationships. Staff told us leaders were approachable and available, and felt supported to raise concerns or ask for guidance when needed.

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

Staff told us they felt empowered to speak up and raise concerns when needed. People and relatives also knew how to raise concerns and felt confident doing so.

The service had a whistleblowing policy in place, and staff were knowledgeable about it. Staff described several routes for raising concerns, including informal discussions, daily huddles and escalation to senior management. One staff member told us they could raise a concern with the nominated individual if they did not feel comfortable approaching the management team directly. Staff felt confident their concerns would be listened to and acted upon.

When concerns were raised, leaders responded sensitively and appropriately. Staff described leaders as open to feedback and supportive, which helped reinforce a culture of trust.

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.

Leaders understood the importance of equality and worked to ensure staff were treated fairly and with respect, regardless of background or protected characteristics. Policies were in place to support equality, diversity and inclusion, and these were reflected in day‑to‑day practice.

Staff told us they felt supported and valued at work. We observed a diverse staff team who worked well together and spoke positively about their experience of working at the home. Staff had access to equality and diversity training, which supported their understanding of inclusive practice and helped reduce the risk of discrimination, bullying or harassment. Leaders were alert to potential inequalities and encouraged staff to raise concerns or suggestions for improvement.

Leaders supported equality of opportunity for staff, including opportunities for development and progression. Staff were encouraged to progress into roles such as medicines technicians or senior care assistants, which helped promote fairness and inclusion within the workforce. Reasonable adjustments were made where needed to support staff in their roles.

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 deputy manager carried out a range of audits to monitor quality, safety and performance, including audits of medicines, incidents, accidents, the environment and equipment. Feedback from people living at the home and their relatives was gathered and considered as part of governance processes. Where issues were identified, action plans were developed and used to drive improvement.

Completed audits were reviewed and used to inform changes where necessary, helping ensure care remained safe and effective. The deputy manager demonstrated a good understanding of regulatory requirements, including responsibilities around notifications and the duty of candour.

There were arrangements in place to support sustainability and business continuity. The service had a comprehensive business continuity plan outlining how care would continue safely in the event of an emergency or significant disruption. Overall, governance and management arrangements supported the delivery of safe, effective and sustainable care.

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.

Systems were in place to support collaborative working when people’s needs changed. Information was shared appropriately with external professionals to support safe, coordinated care and positive outcomes for people.

The service worked openly and transparently with a range of external partners. We saw referrals had been made proactively, with recent involvement from dietitians, occupational therapists, district nurses and GPs. This collaborative approach helped ensure people received timely, specialist support and care was adjusted when needed. Staff and leaders communicated effectively with professionals and followed recommendations to improve people’s health and wellbeing.

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.

There was a clear commitment to reviewing practice and identifying opportunities to improve people’s experiences and outcomes. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and learning was shared with staff through daily huddles and team meetings.

People were involved where appropriate in discussions following concerns or incidents, and their views were used to help shape changes aimed at improving safety and quality of care. Staff were encouraged to speak up with ideas for improvement and felt confident these would be listened to.

The service demonstrated a proactive approach to innovation and evidence‑based practice. For example, the deputy manager had used a dementia simulation tool, which is designed to replicate the visual and perceptual challenges experienced by people living with dementia. This was used to make environmental adjustments within the home to improve navigation, safety and comfort for people.