Caring@Home Ltd

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 service scored 64 (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 demonstrated a shared vision, strategy, and culture based on transparency, equity, equality, human rights, diversity, and inclusion. On the day of inspection, the provider’s mission statement was clearly displayed.

The nominated individual explained that learning from feedback, complaints, and incidents was shared with staff to improve outcomes. We saw staff meeting minutes which evidenced shared learning and the discussion of service improvements. Staff spoke positively about their roles and told us they enjoyed supporting people and ensuring they were happy and safe.

Not all leaders fully understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. While leaders demonstrated some commitment to person‑centred care and aspects of the organisation’s values, these were not always consistently embedded across the service. Leaders did not always demonstrate the full range of skills, knowledge, experience, and credibility required to lead effectively, and there were occasions where integrity, openness, and transparency were not consistently evident.

There were some strengths in leadership oversight. During discussions, the Nominated Individual demonstrated a good understanding of person-centred care and showed commitment to maintaining continuity of support for people using the service.

However, we found shortfalls that had not been identified by leaders. This meant some learning was needed to ensure effective undertaking of regulatory responsibilities, including comprehensive understanding of the Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture guidance that underpins support provided to people with a learning disability.

The provider fostered a positive culture in which people felt able to speak up and have their views listened to.

Staff told us that the provider was approachable and supportive, and that any concerns could be raised with the manager or director. One staff member said they felt listened to and supported. Staff were aware of a whistleblowing policy and told us they would feel confident using this to raise concerns if needed, which supported an open and transparent culture.

People using the service told us they felt confident to raise concerns and knew how to contact the provider if needed. This demonstrated an open and transparent culture within the service.

We also observed that the provider had a suggestions box in place, encouraging care staff to share their ideas, feedback, and comments.

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.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to supporting staff wellbeing and maintaining regular engagement with staff. Weekly group staff check-ins were held, providing regular opportunities for communication, wellbeing support, and open discussion. Staff told us, “I attend the office at least twice a month and feel appreciated in my role. The management team listens, discusses matters openly, and acts fairly."

The provider did not always demonstrate clear responsibilities, defined roles, effective systems of accountability, or robust governance arrangements. They did not always act on the best available information relating to risk, performance, and outcomes, nor consistently share this information appropriately when required.

At the last inspection, the provider did not have effective systems in place to assess, monitor, and improve the quality and safety of the service, or to mitigate risks, which placed people at risk of harm. At this inspection, we saw systems had been introduced to monitor, record, and document actions taken; however, these were not always completed consistently.

For example, the complaints and concerns recording system showed that some concerns had been documented; however, the actions taken in response were not always recorded. This indicated a lack of consistent recording and oversight. Similar patterns were identified in medication guidance, and safety assessments, where records were not always completed in a consistent or comprehensive way. This meant processes were not yet fully embedded in practice, which reduced assurance that risks were being effectively identified, monitored, and managed. However, we observed that auditing of care times was effective, with concerns identified, appropriately documented, followed up and feedback from people also supported this.

The provider demonstrated an understanding of the importance of partnership working to support positive outcomes for people. They told us they received referrals from the local authority and worked collaboratively with professionals, including social workers. Staff also told us they reported and documented any changes or concerns appropriately, which supported the sharing of important information.

The provider demonstrated a clear understanding of their duty to collaborate and ensure services operated seamlessly for people. Information and learning were shared with relevant partners to support continuous improvement. For example, we saw regular correspondence between the provider and healthcare professionals regarding updates and changes in people’s care and support. Staff told us they reported and documented any changes or concerns appropriately.

The provider did not always demonstrate a focus on continuous learning, innovation, and improvement across the organisation and within the local system. They did not always encourage creative approaches to delivering equality of experience, outcomes, and quality of life for people, and contributed to promoting safe and effective practice.

The provider supported people with complex health conditions, and staff had not always received training specific to these needs. This increased the risk that care may not always be delivered safely, effectively, or in line with recognised best practice.

However, the provider told us they encourage training and development within the team and discussed plans for additional staff training, including opportunities to complete Level 2 and Level 3 diplomas in health and social care, once eligibility criteria are met.

Staff told us, “They train you to be a good carer.”