Arc 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. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated 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 71 (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. The provider outlined their aims, values and vision which was passed down and shared with staff during meetings. Leader told us they had spoken with staff and discussed with them what they thought the values of the organisation was and this was how the values were initially formed.

The provider gave people a booklet at the start of support which outlined the vision, mission and values. The booklet also outlined the aims and objectives of the organisation and had visual aids to guide people. There was a strategy plan which had been reviewed in March 2025 and included a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis. The strategy document contained a staffing strategy and outlined the challenges they faced with the recruitment of front line staff. It also included the services focus for the next year which included reference to the government policy on international recruitment and what they needed to do to ensure they worked in line with this policy.

The provider had 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 did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Leaders were aware of the priorities and challenges for the service and were currently working on recruiting more care co-ordinators to strengthen their management structure.

The organisation had two key leaders and were aware of needing to have a much stronger structure in place in case of any emergencies. Leaders currently worked cohesively together and in partnership with others and this was demonstrated through the feedback we received from people, staff and partners. For example, one staff member told us, “One thing I can say is about [Leaders], I’ve never met people more committed to something, It’s really nice to watch, they know every client, they know every one so well, so any questions they can answer.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they were able to speak to leaders about any concerns they had. One staff member commented, “I think they are really good, I feel they have made an open space, I can only speak for myself, but if there is something going on I can always tell them about concerns I have or issues going on with me. Another staff member told us, “They are visible, I can contact them easily. I can contact them anytime even with personal issues.” There was a whistleblowing policy and procedure in place which staff had access to. Supervision and team meeting notes reviewed showed staff were regularly able to have their voices heard.

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. We saw two examples of where reasonable adjustments had been made for staff. Staff did not raise any concerns and told us they had not experienced any discrimination towards them. There were policies and procedures to support workforce, equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff had received training in Equality, Diversity and Human Rights.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability. For example, we identified some shortfalls in governance around the effectiveness of audits taking place. Concerns we identified, in relation to a risk assessment not being in place for a person who smoked and regularly used paraffin-based emollients creams, had not been picked up during the providers audits. Concerns identified in relation to conflicting instructions between a person’s medication record and the care plan for a rescue medication had not been identified during audits. Furthermore, unclear information about dosage instruction for a person’s pain relief medication had also not been identified during audits. The provider immediately rectified the concerns an updated documentation during the inspection.

We found audits had also not identified conflicting information noted on an MCA about a person’s diagnosis and whether they had capacity or not. The provider updated the documentation which verified they had acted on the concerns we identified during the inspection. However, although we identified some audits were not effective, there were regular audits completed and the service was also regularly audited by another provider they worked in partnership with.

The care planning systems provided alerts to leaders when actions needed to be completed, and the provider had developed other systems such as a ‘Tracker spreadsheet’ which had information about complaints, compliments, safeguarding, service user feedback and notifications to CQC and the local authority. The provider had a General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) policy to support the confidentiality of records and staff had received training in data protection.

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 told us the service worked with partners on their behalf. Partners provided positive feedback about their experiences of working with the service to improve and enhance people’s lives. They told us leaders communicated well with them and were open and transparent. Leaders regularly attended meeting with local partners to build on their learning and share knowledge.

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. The provider had recently commissioned a new case management systemto complete people’s care plans and risk assessment and they were in the process of transferring people’s information over. They told us this was much more ‘bespoke’ and would give them more time to be effective in their roles due to the alerts built into the system.

Leaders told us about their future plans to develop the service and the management structure they planned to put in place to strengthen the leadership in the service. They also told us about discussions taking place with a partnership they are involved with about alternative transport options for getting staff to scheduled appointments more economically and environmentally friendly.