Prosper Care

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider told us their mission statement was to deliver person-centred care, which was tailored to each individual to help maintain their independence. The registered manager said their ethos of supported living was for staff to support people to live independent lives and not to do everything for them. They also told us that they had an open door policy for both staff and people living at the service. They said that although it was a small staff team there was an open culture and everyone’s opinion mattered. Staff knew the mission statement and supported people to remain independent. Staff told us there was an open culture at the service. People at the service told us they felt respected and were supported to be independent.

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.

The registered manager was also a director of the service. At the time of the inspection the other director of the service was on maternity leave. The registered manager told us how they worked together to ensure they both had oversight of the service. They had experience in other sectors as well as adult social care and used these skills to maintain governance and oversight of the service. They understood their role and ensured other staff members were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

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

People told us they knew who to contact if they had any issues and they felt comfortable to do so. Staff told us both the registered manager and the provider encouraged them to share their concerns and ways of working to help improve the service. One staff member said “I can talk to [registered manager] and [provider] about anything. They are approachable and are happy to help me if I need support.”

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.

However, the staff team was small and not currently diverse, with most staff having worked for a company owned by 1 of the directors. We discussed the importance of promoting inclusion when appointing new team members. The registered manager assured us that a robust conflict of interest policy was in place

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 registered manager was able to tell us about their governance processes. They had audits in place to ensure the safety of people using the service. These audits were completed by the registered manager, and the provider also carried out spot checks when on site. The registered manager acknowledged some areas of the environment highlighted during the inspection t would be added to their audits. As part of this, a maintenance log was introduced to monitor and track areas of improvement needed in the environment.

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 told us they [staff] worked well with health and social care professionals to support people living at the service. The registered manager also said they had networks with the local community. This included neighbours in the cul de sac where the service is located as well as involvement in community groups which were attended by a person at the service.

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. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The registered manager investigated accidents and incidents when they occurred. They acted on information they had through monitoring the service. The service was the only location owned by the provider. The registered manager and provider recognised that they were still learning all the time. They said they had learnt from the inspection and would continue to monitor the service for ways in which to improve and ensure positive outcomes for the people living there.