Highfield 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

We assessed 3 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last assessment, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. People were complimentary about the leadership approach of the management team and how supportive and accessible they all were. The provider had clear systems of accountability and governance in place which enabled the service to deliver good quality, safe care and treatment. There was a commitment to continuous improvement and learning when things went wrong, to improve practices at the service.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff told us the service was well-led and there was an experienced management team in place. Another member of staff remarked, “I love coming to work. All the managers are so approachable and are always around to offer you advice and support whenever you need it.” Another member of staff added, “We have a fantastic management team here who run a tight ship. They’re so supportive. I couldn’t think of a better place to work.”

There had been a recent change in management at the service, and at the time of our assessment the service did not have a registered manager in post. The new manager had been employed for a couple of months and had started the registration process. They had taken the time to review the service and get to know the staff working there. They had identified what was working well and where they wanted to make improvements. There was clear management structures and reporting procedures in place. Work had been undertaken recently to make it clearer to staff about what was within their role and what their responsibilities were.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

It was clear from feedback we received, the managers and staff now had a better understanding of their governance roles and responsibilities in relation to assessing, monitoring and managing the quality and safety of the service they provided people. Managers told us they routinely conducted internal audits to check specific records and tasks. They said these audits and checks were analysed at regular intervals to identify performance shortfalls, learn lessons, and develop action plans to improve the care and treatment people living at the care home received. The managers understood their responsibilities in relation to their regulatory requirements around notifiable incidents.

A detailed governance structure was in place to review the quality and safety of practices at the service. There was a regular programme of audit to review practices. The findings from the audits and key performance data, including data relating to safeguarding, incidents and clinical needs, were reviewed and discussed as part of quarterly quality and clinical governance reports and meetings. These reports clearly presented trends and themes, and on the whole we saw for Highfield House the number of adverse events had reduced over the last 12 months.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Managers and staff recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement to ensure people living at Highfield House received good quality, safe care and treatment. Managers told us all the audits and checks the provider conducted were routinely analysed to identify performance shortfalls and learn lessons, so the service could continuously improve. Staff confirmed information about any lessons learnt were always shared with them during individual and group supervision meetings with their line managers.

There were systems in place to ensure the ongoing review of quality and make improvements where required. Systems continued to be adapted and strengthened to improve the quality and safety of care delivery. Recently there had been a number of improvements made to the staff induction, training and competency assessment process to ensure all staff had the knowledge and skills to undertake their role and that they were well supported in their role. A service improvement plan was in place to further improve practices, with the focus being on the quality of care documentation.