Holly Park 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. There was a new management team in place and recent changes in oversight arrangements and teamwork had contributed to improvements in quality and safety. Further improvements were required to ensure audits were strengthened. The registered manager was working effectively with the provider, people, relatives and staff to ensure improvements were continued and new processes embedded.

This service scored 68 (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 processes in place to engage with people, relatives and staff. Regular team meetings were held with all groups of staff. Staff described a strong sense of teamwork. Comments included, “[Registered manager] has led well and made improvements to create a more professional environment and has worked on having a consistent approach.” Staff commented that there was less collaborative working with the provider but they understood the visions and values of the service.

The services statement of purpose clearly stated the home's values.

There was a new registered manager and deputy manager in place at the service. They had the skills and experience to lead the team. They were visible and were working to establish good relationships with stakeholders, the staff team and people who used the service. They demonstrated a good understanding of the needs of the service. There had been recent changes to how the service was managed which required embedding to ensure recent improvements which had been implemented were sustained. The new management team assured us they were committed and experienced enough to deliver this.

All the staff we spoke with told us the registered manager was visible and approachable and expressed their confidence in them. Comments included, “Everything is better since [Registered manager] joined” and “The manager has got the support of the team and the residents absolutely love them.” People and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager and said they were approachable and felt listened to.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider had a Whistleblowing Policy in place. Staff felt able to raise concerns and understood the importance of speaking up to protect people.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. Staff were treated fairly and equitably in work and during the application and selection process. Staff told us they felt supported and encouraged by the new management team. The provider had an up to date recruitment policy and employed a diverse staff team. Human resources processes were in place to ensure staff understood their rights as employees.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and governance arrangements. 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.

Audits were in place to cover all key areas of the care and support people received, staff knowledge and skills and the health and safety of the service. However, improvements were required to some of the auditing processes. Care plan audits had not identified some of the shortfalls we identified. Provider audits did not always reflect action had been taken where shortfalls were found. Checks on call bell response times were not robust. The registered manager sampled some call bell times, but these were carried out when there were more staff on duty and further checks at other key times, such as early morning or during the night were not checked. The registered manager confirmed they were working with the system supplier to be able to gather and analyse more date about call response times.

The provider had policies in place. They were regularly reviewed to ensure they reflected current good practice guidance.

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 collaborated with the local authority and other health and social care professionals. They told us they planned to increase opportunities for positive engagement with the local community, including establishing links with local schools. Partners told us the registered manager worked collaboratively with them.

Since starting in post, the registered manager had focused on key elements relating to the safety of people's care and support but there was a drive and commitment to continue and develop this in order to further enhance people's lives. The registered manager spoke passionately about working closely with staff and increasing their knowledge, skills and involvement in improvements. Many of the changes were new and required more time to become embedded. Further improvements were required to strengthen the quality of auditing processes, care plans and the environment. Processes were in place to support this, including regular meetings with the provider and an overarching action plan which covered all key areas people’s care and support.