Marina Homecare Ltd T/A Visiting Angels Barnet and Enfield Also known as Visiting Angels Barnet and Enfield

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 leadership,managementand governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

If this is the first rating of a service state: This is the first assessment for this newly registeredservice. This key question has been ratedgood.

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 had a clear culture of what they wanted their service to be. A person-centred care experience for people receiving sensitive thoughtful care, from staff who were not rushed and had the time to provide it. This is what people and staff told us was happening in practice. The registered manager was also operating to this model of care. Staff told us they had worked for care agencies in the past where this culture was not present, this is why they stayed working for Marina Homecare Ltd Visiting Angels Barnet and Enfield.

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.

The provider and registered manager had led effectively, ensuring people received safe and compassionate care. People and their relatives spoke well of the care they received and when they engaged with the office and registered manager. Staff said they had started to get to know the recently appointed registered manager and felt supported. They recommended working for the service.

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

Staff said they felt confident speaking up if they needed to. We saw examples of relatives and people raising some issues with the registered manager, who evidenced these had been handled in a timely way.

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 who came from overseas were checked to ensure they could work with the agency, which also supported them to work safely. The service’s ‘values’ were connected to these principles which staff received training on. Staff talked about the additional training courses they had recently taken to develop their careers in social care.

The provider did have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to deliver good quality care. But they did not always act on the best information about performance. Some aspects of their quality monitoring processes needed improving.

We found some shortfalls with the registered manager and provider’s quality monitoring of risk assessments, care planning, and an aspect of fully responding to a known incident. There were also shortfalls in staff recruitment checks and how they applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which required improvement. No one had come to harm as a result of these issues, but there was a potential risk in the future. The provider and registered manager said they took our feedback fully on board and they would make the necessary improvements. They talked us through how they planned to do this.

The provider and registered manager had also delivered effective leadership in checking and keeping a close eye on care delivery. Namely, people receiving a quality care experience, at times they wanted, with staff who they know and felt comfortable with.

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 registered manager was reaching out to professionals and making the appropriate referrals to encourage their engagement. The provider was working with local social care organisations to promote better partnership working and promote good practice.

The provider focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged ways of delivering quality of life for people.

The provider and registered manager audited key aspects of the delivery of care to ensure people received the appropriate care. Lessons were learnt when something went wrong and this was shared with staff. When we raised some shortfalls we had found, they accepted this feedback and started making plans to improve.