New Age 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.

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the 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 legal regulation in relation to the governance of the service. Improvements were found during this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 57 (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 did not have a clear strategy in place to facilitate a safe and effective transition to their new electronic management systems. This meant some information was not easily accessible and some information was inaccurate.

During this inspection, we gave feedback to the management team about the issues we had found, and they acted quickly to address these. While improvements have been made following our feedback, further work is needed to ensure actions are fully implemented and embedded, leading to sustained improvements in the quality of the service people receive.

The management team supported an open culture and had created a strong team ethos. Staff spoke positively about working at the service and felt well supported in their roles. One staff member told us, “I think it’s a good place to work. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be here, and I wouldn’t have stayed so long.” Another staff member said, “Oh I love it, I’ve been really welcomed, I enjoyed my training day it was great as I met a lot of new people in the same position and the clients are really lovely.”

Processes to involve people and staff in developing the culture included seeking people's feedback through informal chats, phone calls and questionnaires on the quality of care and service provided. Where suggestions were made, action was taken.

The provider had inclusive leaders; however, they had not always maintained effective oversight of the service. Quality monitoring systems were not always effective, as they had failed to identify some of the issues we found. For example, shortfalls relating to the oversight of time-critical medicines. Where issues had been identified by the provider’s quality assurance processes, timely action had not always been taken to ensure they were addressed. The leaders demonstrated integrity, openness and honesty.

People and relatives knew who the registered manager was and were confident to approach them or the wider management team. One person said, “I know all the managers, all are friendly and communicate well and will follow through any concerns.” Another person told us, “The live-in manager is very good and efficient.”

People and relatives told us they were happy with the service provided. One person said, “Yes, I would recommend the company. I am happy with my care.” A relative told us, “I would recommend New Age Care, very happy, gives me peace of mind [Person] is looked after and has some company."

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and told us they felt supported by the registered manager. One staff member said, “I work closely with the registered manager. She is very supportive. I can ask how to do things and how to move things forward. She always checks if I am ok and that my workload is manageable.” Another staff member told us, “The registered manager is a people person. You can approach her about anything. I have felt supported from when I started.”

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

Staff felt confident to raise any issues or concerns with the registered manager and wider management team if needed. One staff member told us, “I feel well supported by the management team. They are approachable and available when we need any support or advice. I do feel any concerns raised are listened to and dealt with appropriately.” Another staff member said, “I can go to the registered manager with anything, she’s the best manager I’ve ever had. If I’ve got a problem, she does listen and she gets back to me.”

The provider also held regular team meetings, where staff had the opportunity to raise concerns and offer suggestions. One staff member told us, “Yes, it’s free communication for everybody, whether it’s accepted or not, but we are given opportunity to talk freely.”

The registered manager understood the need to be open and honest when things went wrong in line with their responsibilities under the duty of candour.

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.

Staff felt they were valued and supported by the management team. One staff member told us, “This is a good place to work. There are opportunities to progress, good teamwork, and we talk to each other. We all get on well. Everyone is respectful.” All staff had the opportunity to provide feedback through questionnaires.

Diversity and important religious events were promoted and celebrated on social media posts such as Holi, a Hindu festival. Posts also supported and raised awareness for example; women going through the menopause and people living with disabilities.

The management team promoted equality and inclusion in the workforce by supporting staff with flexible working requests to help them balance religious prayers, home and work commitments.

The provider’s policies promoted equality and diversity, and a diverse staff team has been recruited to support people using the service.

On the first day of our inspection, the management team were unable to readily access key information required to demonstrate effective oversight of the service. This was partly due to the implementation of a new electronic management system. Whilst leaders were aware of some of these challenges, governance arrangements had not ensured they were addressed in a timely manner and the issues remained unresolved when we returned on the second day of inspection.

Governance arrangements were not operating effectively and had failed to provide consistent oversight of the service. The management team had identified a number of concerns through their own quality assurance processes in January 2026. However, several of these concerns mirrored issues identified during this inspection, demonstrating that action taken had not always been sufficiently timely or effective to ensure improvements were embedded and sustained.

We recognised that a number of the issues identified arose during the implementation of a new electronic management system. However, governance arrangements had not always been effective in managing these challenges or ensuring action was taken to address concerns in a timely manner. Quality assurance systems had not consistently identified or addressed all areas requiring improvement. For example, some policies and procedures contained inaccurate and conflicting information regarding the specific needs of people the service could support. In addition, some documents had not been updated to reflect operational changes associated with the introduction of the new electronic management system.

We also identified shortfalls relating to the provider's oversight of medicines during the transition to the new electronic system. Records indicated some time-sensitive medicines had been administered late; however, there was insufficient information available to demonstrate how this had been reviewed or resolved. A staff member told us, "It's a system and staff training issue. I can't evidence any action taken but we know the medication was given on time and that it's a problem with the log in." The staff member confirmed records had not been maintained to evidence these checks and discussions.

Following our feedback, the provider and management team responded positively and undertook a review of governance arrangements. They took immediate action to address a number of the concerns identified, implemented an action plan to strengthen oversight, accountability and monitoring systems, and provided evidence demonstrating improvements had been made in response to the issues identified during the inspection.

Although governance arrangements were not operating effectively at the time of our inspection, leaders demonstrated an understanding of the concerns identified and a commitment to improving the quality and safety of the service.

The registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and had notified CQC of significant events as required.

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.

Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people had the best outcomes for their health and wellbeing. People and relatives confirmed this. One person said, “They (staff) look after me and will offer any help I need.” A relative told us, “They are really on the ball with [Person’s] medicines and liaising with the doctor and district nurses. They deal with it all and they are very good at that.”

Positive feedback shared from a social care professional who worked closely with the service was “My experience with the service overall was good. I spoke with management several times via phone and email and found them very responsive, happy to help in any way possible and going above and beyond my recommendations to support the individual. I was pleased with my experience and found them very understanding, easy and helpful to work with."

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning and improvement across the service. While some improvements were evident following our last inspection, further improvement was needed to evidence the provider was monitoring the service effectively and ensuring robust governance processes were embedded and sustained.

Improvements had been made to care records, safeguarding processes, and the way the service learned from accidents and incidents. This demonstrated some lessons had been learnt.

The provider and management team were responsive to our feedback and took some immediate actions to address the concerns we identified during our visits.