Richmond Heights

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

Some care records required further development. A plan was already in place to address this with those already audited providing greater detail and support to staff. The provider was not fully aware of their responsibility to inform the CQC about all notifiable incidents and therefore some notifications had not always been submitted in line with the Health and Social Care Act 2008. Staff were positive about the management team and the support they received. Staff and management were seen to work in partnership with people, relatives, and professionals. Overall people and relatives felt the service was managed well but some people and relatives felt communication could be better and some areas improved by better organisation. Staff felt they were consulted and actively involved in service development. The management team were clear about their roles and responsibilities and there were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. This included learning lessons when things went wrong.

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 encouraged staff, people and relatives to provide feedback and raise concerns. They listened and acted on them to help shape the service and culture. Staff told us they felt listened to and able to make suggestions for the development of the service.

Overall, the senior team were knowledgeable about their regulatory responsibilities and about the priorities for the development of the service. The provider monitored the quality and safety of the service. There were processes in place, so lessons were learnt and action taken to improve the service when needed. Staff had opportunities to attend meetings and training sessions, which supported good communication in the team.

The registered manager felt supported in their role, and staff spoke positively about the leadership in the service and felt they were approachable. Staff told us they felt listened to.

A range of audits were carried out to provide oversight of risk and improvement within the service. The relationships we saw between people, their visitors and staff were warm and friendly. The atmosphere in the service was calm and relaxed.

Staff knew how to raise concerns and told us they felt comfortable to do so if needed.

The management team sought feedback about the service through surveys, meetings and reviews, involving people, those close to them, staff and other professionals. The provider had clear information in place for people and for staff on how to raise concerns, including clear complaints and whistle blowing policies.

People, relatives, and staff said they felt respected, supported, and valued. Managers had a good understanding of equality, diversity and human rights.

The provider had clear policies and procedures in place regarding equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights. It was evident the management team followed these so that staff with protected characteristics were supported appropriately and protected from discrimination.

The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities and explained how they maintained oversight of people’s care. There was a clear audit structure in place to make sure key areas of risk were regularly reviewed. Staff were regularly involved in staff meetings and told us they had opportunities to discuss their ideas, opinions and contribute to the governance of the service

Some care plans and risk assessments did not always provide sufficient detail to show how risks were mitigated and how people should be supported. Some care plans also had conflicting information. CQC notifications had not always been submitted for some incidents as required. The registered manager put systems in place to rectify this going forward. The provider had quality assurance systems to oversee and manage the quality and safety of the service. Members of the management and staff team were involved in carrying out a range of audits and checks covering all aspects of the service. Staff fed back daily about any changes in people's support needs or issues via meetings and handovers, which were recorded and monitored. Issues picked up during the inspection were noted to be actioned immediately.

People and their relatives were mainly positive about their experience of the team at Richmond Heights. One person told us, "It is well run and organised." However, some felt that communication could be better and the senior team more visible One relative told us, “They need more communication, not much contact with management.”

Staff told us they worked with healthcare and social care services in the local area to help support people’s needs as well as the local community. They were also positive about the team working within Richmond Heights. One told us, “It's good. Everyone’s happy and get on well.”

Overall feedback from partners was positive about communication and joint working. One commented about working in partnership with Richmond Heights, “It works really well. They highlight things really well.”

Records seen evidenced involvement of partners. The service worked with a range of partners and had established links with local services and the local community. Staff worked with a range of healthcare services and hospitals and community organisations such as local schools and places of worship.

Staff could describe the benefits of the support and training they received and the opportunities the provider offered for personal development. Staff spoke positively about of the provider and the management team in the service. One staff member said, “Yes they are approachable and fair.”

The provider had systems in place to seek and act on feedback from people, families and staff and systems in place to monitor and improve the service. The registered manager had good oversight of the service and was open to suggestions on improvement. Where we identified areas that required attention these were actioned immediately.