Allfor Care Alpha Care Recruitment West and Home Care Service Limited

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 remained requires improvement. This meant the service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. Improvements were not found at this assessment, and the provider remained in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 62 (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 clear vision and values for the service. The provider developed a set of values, objectives and a strategy for the ongoing development of the service. Care workers were positive about their experience of working for the service. Their comments included, “They provide the support I need to carry out my daily task”, “The best thing is making a positive difference in people's lives with great support from the team”, and “Office staff are very helpful, welcoming and supportive.”

The registered manager confirmed there were regular staff meeting where policies, procedures and issues were discussed with care workers.

People and relatives told us they felt the service was, in general, well run and most people confirmed they would recommend the service. Their comments included, “I would say that it doesn’t have a negative impact on my life. They enhance my life. Yes, I would recommend this service” and “Yes, I think the service is well run. Yes, I would recommend them to the other people.”

The provider had a clear management system at the service. The registered manager confirmed they were supported by a deputy manager, care supervisors, senior care workers, a medication officer and an activities coordinator. There were staff responsible for quality assurance and recruitment who worked across the provider’s locations. Care workers felt supported by senior management through team meetings, supervisions and regular communication. A care worker commented, “On regular basis you will just get a telephone call to ask how you are doing and how you find the jobs and if you are happy with service Allfor Care is providing to their staff. You will just see your supervisor turn up unannounced of your calls to do a spot check.”

The provider had processes for staff and people to raise any concerns. Staff knew how to raise any concerns and felt confident if they had to raise an issue. The registered manager explained there was a whistleblowing policy and information on the process was included in the staff handbook and discussed during supervision and team meetings. People and relatives knew how to raise issues and how to contact the office.

Care workers felt they were supported by the provider and were able to speak to senior staff if they had any questions. A care worker told us, “There is always someone at the end of the phone whenever you need talk.”

A care worker explained that the provider had supported them to access an English language course at college which helped them when communicating with the people they supported. The registered manager confirmed they supported care workers if they were experiencing issues with their language skills through role play for care visits and allocating them to support people with a similar language and cultural background.

The provider’s processes for monitoring and improving the quality of the service were not always robust enough to indicate areas where action was required. The audits of care plans had not identified that some people had consented to their care but a mental capacity assessment had indicated that the person did not have capacity to make decisions about their care.

In addition, these audits did not identify where risk management plans were required, and care workers were not provided with guidance on how to achieve the goals and outcomes described in the care plan.

Care plans did not always provide enough detail for care workers on the support required. The care plan for one person who was supported by care workers overnight did not include information on what care was required during this time. The care plans for people who received support to undertake activities they enjoyed both at home and in the community did not always provide care workers with guidance on what the person enjoyed and how the care worker could meet that need.

The provider had not implemented processes to ensure all systems used to record the administration of medicines could be audited. The provider could not demonstrate there was a system in place to collect and review the paper based records and the MAR audit did not indicate there had been any issues with the electronic recording system.

The registered manager confirmed additional audits were regularly carried out which reviewed safeguarding, complaints, record of care provided and visit times.

The registered manager confirmed they had employed an external service improvement consultant to support the service.

The provider worked with a range of external organisations. The registered manager explained that the staff worked with social workers and the local authority in relation to people’s care packages and supporting their needs. The provider also worked with a range of healthcare professionals including psychologists, speech and language therapists, district nurses and dieticians to ensure the relevant professional were involved in people’s care.

The provider had developed processes for learning and identifying best practice. The registered manager told us they attended training, manager forums, Home Care Association conferences and training as well as working with an external company to review their audits and processes.

Care workers explained that senior staff discussed how to reduce risk after something going wrong for example following and incident and accident or complaint. Their comments included, “When things go wrong the issue is reviewed and supervisor often discusses it with the team identifying causes and prevent issues” and “When things go wrong, the issue is reviewed, and supervisor often discuss with the team and resolve it.” A range of policies and procedures had been developed and reviewed regularly to reflect current legislation and best practice.