Marygold Care UK 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led.

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 that supported people to receive compassionate, person centred care for people in supported living settings. Staff described wanting to do their best for people and demonstrated commitment to supporting their independence.

The culture within the service encouraged openness, particularly around incidents, which were seen as learning opportunities rather than blame. Staff were described as skilled, consistent and understanding, particularly when supporting people with complex needs or behaviours that could be challenging. A relative said, “They know how to care for children with special needs. They know the needs of my children and the children are also very familiar with them.” Another relative said, “The staff are well trained and know what they are doing.”

Staff told us management encouraged a positive culture of learning and development at the service. They said they felt listened too and valued. Staff were aligned with the provider’s values and were positive and enthusiastic about their roles. They told us management were open to their suggestions about how to improve the running of the service. A member of staff said, “Management listen and they are responsive and they are always very accessible.”

Staff undertook a range of training and had used this to help ensure procedures were followed to provide people with good quality care. There was regular communication between staff so that they could share their experiences and learn from one another. Systems and processes had been designed in line with the service’s vision and values and focused on people and meeting their individual needs.

The provider had inclusive leaders 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. Relatives spoke positively about the management and overall running of the service. A relative told us, “The service is amazing. I would give them millions of stars. We are happy because they treat [family member] with dignity.” Another relative said, “Very well managed, I have a really good rapport with the manager, they know the family well and are very accommodating and supportive.”

There was an organisational structure in place and staff understood their roles, responsibilities and contributions to the service. Management were responsive when things went wrong and took action to make improvements. Throughout the assessment of the service, management and staff we spoke with acted with openness, integrity and transparency.

Staff told us management were knowledgeable and provided them with the support they needed to do their job effectively. There was open and ongoing communication between the management team and staff. Staff were complimentary about the leadership approach of the registered manager who they consistently described as approachable.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people and relatives felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. There were clear reporting structures, staff understood who to speak up to and how.

People, relatives, and staff were encouraged to speak up, and they told us they felt able to do so. A relative said, “Marygold Care is very accommodating, and I am confident if I had any concerns I would be listened to.” Another relative told us, “I know the manager, they are easily contactable and I would recommend the company and I would rate them 8/10.”

Staff told us they felt confident that they could raise any issues with the leaders, and they would be taken seriously and investigated. The provider had a whistle blowing policy in place, which detailed how staff could speak up about any concerns they had about the service. In addition, management were regularly in contact with staff and this helped to promote an open rapport and effective working relationships.

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 valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture and had policies and procedures in place around workforce equality and diversity. The leadership team were sensitive and responsive to staff’s individual circumstances. This helped to ensure reasonable adjustments were made to accommodate staff’s needs where possible.

Staff spoke positively about working at the service and said that their diversity needs were met. Staff were supported with flexible working conditions, felt discrimination would be challenged and had opportunities to celebrate their diversity. Staff told us they felt well supported by the management team and felt like a valued member of the team.

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.

Staff were supported by management to deliver consistently safe, person-centred care and support to people in line with their vision and values for the service. The provider used audits and checks, individual and group meetings to help make sure staff understood how the service’s values should be achieved through their working practices.

Effective systems and processes were in place to help monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service to help ensure risks were identified and mitigated, enabling and empowering people to receive good quality and safe care. Governance processes were in place. Audits and checks were carried out consistently. Audits included regular checks as well as an electronic monitoring system which enabled the service to monitor various aspects of the running of the service in real time.

There was a clear management structure in place, with all staff being clear on their duties and responsibilities. Management had clear oversight of the running of the service.

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 provider told us they worked with other professionals to help make sure people received continuity in their care.

There was a good relationship with health and social care professionals to ensure people received consistent, good quality care and support. The management team and staff understood the importance and benefits of working with other professionals.

People’s community participation was encouraged and supported, with staff supporting people to access activities, develop independence and build relationships outside of their home.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement. Management looked for ways to improve the running of the service and the quality of care people received. Systems were in place to seek feedback from people, relatives and staff. People and relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback through meetings, reviews and quality assurance checks.

The culture within the service promoted honesty and learning from mistakes and there was a clear understanding of the need to be open in the event of anything going wrong.

The provider promoted a learning culture within the service. Staff received on-going mandatory training and training to meet people’s specific needs.