Heathcotes Yorkshire Supported Living Office

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

We rated well-led as Requires Improvement. We assessed 7 quality statements on leadership and governance. We found a breach of regulation in relation to the governance of the service. We found that the processes in place to review the safety and quality within the service were ineffective in highlighting the concerns raised at this inspection. These concerns had also previously been identified within the warning notice from the last inspection. Some improvements had been made in the service, with leaders showing they had the skills, knowledge and experience to lead well. However, more time was needed for these new processes to fully embed good practice. Staff and family members spoke positively about the changes in management and improvements made in recent months.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Leaders were clear about the direction they wanted to take the service in and the culture they wanted to develop. Staff were aware and could tell us what the service’s values were and demonstrated these values throughout our interactions with them. Staff told us there had been improvements since the change in management and the home was a better place to work.

The provider had booklets to outline their strategy, direction and culture and a 1-page poster which summarised this.

Staff told us that there had been a lack of stable and consistent leadership and management within the service which had impacted on how the service was run and their morale. However, they felt this had improved in recent months with new managers in position. Staff told us that the new manager listened, took action and cared about staff and the people they supported.

Leaders we spoke with were passionate about delivering person-centred, quality care. Improvement had been made since the last inspection, however leaders acknowledged more work was needed to evidence a sustained and consistent improvement. Time was needed to further embed new processes and to review inconsistencies in practice which meant regulations were still not fully met at this inspection. The manager was in the process of becoming registered with the Care Quality Commission. Staff meetings had recently started following the new management team being in place, more time was needed to fully evidence the impact of these meetings within the service.

Staff were aware of how to raise concerns, if they were concerned, both internally and externally. Staff told us they were confident these would be treated with confidentiality and that appropriate action would be taken.

We saw that the service had a forum for staff to raise concerns anonymously internally and these were investigated appropriately. The service also had a policy which signposted staff appropriately to external agencies should staff want to raise concerns externally. The provider kept a log of all whistleblowing concerns raised both internally and externally including outcomes and actions.

Staff we spoke to told us they were treated fairly, listened to and hadn’t faced any form of discrimination in the workplace. Staff also told us that they were supported to work hours that fitted around childcare to allow for a positive work-life balance.

The provider had a policy on workforce equality, diversity and inclusion that was in date and adhered to. The service also provided staff with equality, diversity and inclusion training which has been completed by 90% of staff across the 2 supported living services. The provider had a number of initiatives and schemes to support staff well-being and to recognise and reward staff’s hard work. Support and resources were also available to staff around their mental, emotional, financial, and physical well-being.

Staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities but had felt unsupported and that there was a lack of guidance and direction during periods that the service had no management oversight. Staff at one of the services told us that there wasn’t always a team leader, and a clear lack of accountability led to tasks such as re-ordering of medicines being missed.

Following our last inspection leaders had developed an action plan to track progress against improvements needed and had made good progress. We saw that medication audits were completed but for 1 service the audit hadn’t highlighted the concerns we identified on inspection. Audits around HR records had also not identified oversights with uploading of evidence to the HR system which were identified on inspection. New systems the service had introduced for recording accident and incidents allowed remote oversight from senior management at provider level, however these had not identified or led to action taken when accidents and incidents remained open without action for a long period of time.

The service worked with other organisations and people had access to the relevant health professionals. We saw how people were supported to go out into the community on trips and to attend day services.

Staff told us how they worked with other professionals to support the needs of people. This included GP’s, physiotherapists and occupational therapists. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and activities they enjoyed, which staff supported with.

Partners and visiting professionals had noticed a positive change in the service in recent months with new managers in position. There were no concerns raised but they said they were confident the manager would action any issues identified.

We saw that care plans included involvement, contact details and guidance from other professionals involved in the person’s care. Referrals had been made where unmet needs or new risks were identified. People regularly accessed day centres and the community for outings they enjoyed with the correct level of staff support to keep them safe.

Staff told us that since changes to management had been made improvements were starting to be implemented within the service. However, more time was needed to evidence consistent and sustained improvement in the service. Leaders told us that they had several initiatives, and staff benefits to help with staff retention and staff morale.

Further work was needed to evidence learning and improvements from accidents and incidents. We saw that action plans were in place around the improvements required in response to the warning notice, however, areas of concern were still not fully addressed which meant the breaches of regulation were not fully met. Internal auditing systems had improved since the last inspection, however, governance systems failed to highlight the concerns raised at this inspection. We recognise that improvement had been made since the last inspection in many key areas of care. However, more time is needed to further implement and embed the positive changes that the new management team are introducing to the service.