APT Care Limited Also known as Chaucer House

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 meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 79 (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.

Leaders described an organisational culture focused on honesty, learning, and continuous improvement. Staff told us they felt listened to, found the management team approachable, and described the service as well organised and well managed. They said concerns could be raised without fear of blame and that learning from issues was encouraged. This reinforced a shared commitment to quality, inclusion, and safe care across the service.

The provider’s values and mission were clearly set out in information shared with people using the service. This explained what people could expect from staff, including respectful behaviour, clear identification, consent before entering people’s homes, and communication about changes to care. This supported trust, transparency, and mutual respect between people, staff, and the organisation.

The provider had exceptionally 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 always did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People and relatives consistently described leadership and management as accessible, responsive, and supportive. One person told us, “They ring up every month to see how things are going and they are always good at getting back to me.” A relative echoed this by telling us leaders had provided reassurance through regular contact, saying the manager “was constantly on the phone checking that [family member] was getting the right care.” This proactive approach helped prevent concerns escalating and increased people’s confidence in the service.

Staff also gave very positive feedback about leadership. One staff member said, “APT company is the best company I’ve worked for. The level of support is brilliant… it honestly feels like a big family community.” Staff described a positive and inclusive culture where the management team were approachable, listened to concerns, and encouraged learning and improvement. This created a highly motivated workforce and enabled staff to consistently deliver safe, person-centred care.

Leaders were visible, knowledgeable, and engaged in day-to-day operations. They promoted regular communication through team meetings, supervisions, and open discussions. Staff spoke positively about opportunities for development and feeling recognised and valued, which supported high levels of retention and continuity of care for people using the service.

People and relatives told us the service was well organised and efficiently managed. Several said they would recommend the service to others. One person told us, “I can always contact the office; they are efficient,” while another said, “I would give them 12 out of 10.” A person who had used the service short term said they would return to the service again in the future, even if this meant arranging and paying for care privately. This demonstrated an exceptional level of trust and satisfaction in the leadership of the service.

Professionals were also positive. One told us, “We would have confidence in recommending the provider. They have demonstrated reliable delivery, good communication, and a constructive approach to partnership working.” This showed leadership effectiveness extended beyond the organisation and supported wider system working.

The provider was transparent about very recent changes to management arrangements and had taken prompt action to ensure continuity of leadership and oversight during this period. A new manager had been recruited, with plans in place to progress registration with CQC. Leadership stability and openness during this transition ensured care quality, staff confidence, and governance standards were maintained without disruption.

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

Staff told us they felt supported, safe, and encouraged to raise concerns or share feedback. One staff member said they were “always given the chance to speak up if they want to share something or have any concerns,” and described management as “very supportive and always approachable.”

Feedback from staff consistently reflected an open and transparent leadership culture. Staff said they felt listened to and able to raise issues without fear of blame. The management team were described as encouraging honesty and openness and creating an environment where learning and improvement were supported.

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.

Leaders described a strong commitment to inclusion and equality, rooted in values of warmth, respect, and fairness. These values were embedded in day-to-day practice and informed how staff were supported, managed, and treated. The provider was a Disability Confident Employer and demonstrated this through reasonable adjustments, including the use of adaptive technology to support staff to work effectively and independently where needed.

Leaders promoted fairness and transparency through consistent expectations and decision-making. Most staff told us they felt treated fairly and equitably, and that concerns were handled appropriately.

The provider took a clear zero-tolerance approach to discrimination and abusive behaviour towards staff. Leaders acted promptly to challenge unacceptable conduct and support staff well-being, demonstrating a strong commitment to equality, dignity, and respect.

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.

People and relatives told us the provider regularly sought feedback, which contributed to ongoing quality monitoring and service improvement.

A comprehensive quality assurance programme was in place, including regular audits of care notes, medicines management, care planning, and record-keeping. Audit findings were analysed to identify themes, with actions taken to address areas for improvement. Positive practice was shared with staff, and learning from audits was used to strengthen consistency and standards across the service.

Electronic care systems supported real-time oversight and secure information sharing. These systems enabled timely responses to concerns, improved the accuracy and completeness of records, and supported leaders to act on performance and risk information. Appropriate statutory notifications were submitted, and information was shared securely with external partners when required.

Business continuity and resilience plans were in place and reviewed regularly. These included arrangements for staffing shortages, emergencies, and service disruption, supporting continuity of care in adverse circumstances.

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.

People and relatives consistently described effective partnership working. Several told us the provider had good relationships with the local authority and other professionals, which supported well-coordinated care arrangements. One person described a “smooth transition from hospital.”

Professionals also gave positive feedback. The provider was described as maintaining a positive and professional relationship, particularly when supporting hospital discharge pathways during periods of system pressure. Records showed regular liaison with a range of health and social care professionals, including GPs, district nurses, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists, and social workers. Referrals and follow-up actions were clearly documented, supporting joined-up care.

The provider worked with local health and care partners to use digital monitoring technology to support people’s health and independence at home. Information gathered through these systems was shared securely with relevant professionals, helping to identify changes in people’s health early and reduce the risk of avoidable hospital admissions.

The provider also demonstrated a commitment to supporting people to remain connected to their community. Leaders described involvement in local initiatives, charity fundraising and well-being activities, which helped promote social inclusion and engagement for people and staff.

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.

External quality assurance reviews highlighted strong governance, learning, and improvement arrangements. A comprehensive audit programme was in place, with findings analysed to identify trends. Actions were taken to address areas for improvement, and positive practice was shared with staff. Records showed learning from audits was embedded into practice to improve consistency and standards.

The provider used digital systems to support learning and innovation, including electronic care records and monitoring tools. These systems improved record accuracy, supported timely responses to concerns, and enabled leaders to refine care delivery and oversight. Leaders demonstrated a willingness to adapt systems in response to feedback and emerging risks.

Staff were encouraged to reflect on practice and contribute to service improvement. They described learning from incidents, supervisions, and team discussions, and said achievements and positive practice were recognised. Staff recognition initiatives supported motivation, learning, and continuous improvement.

Leaders demonstrated openness to learning during the inspection. Where gaps were identified, prompt action was taken to strengthen policies, training, and monitoring arrangements, supporting ongoing improvement and the sustainability of good-quality care.