Beacon Home Care Services Limited Also known as Beacon Home Care Services Limited Penrith

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 newly 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. The provider and staff worked with people, and their relatives, to build a culture which focused on providing person-centred care and enabled people to remain in their own homes.

Feedback regarding leadership and management and the culture of the services from people and families was very positive overall.

Families told us they would not want anything changed and praised the caring nature of staff, continuity of carers and good communication from supervisors.

Relatives frequently described the service as “organised,” “responsive” and “supportive.”

People and their relatives repeatedly described the care as “excellent,” reliable” and “supportive.”

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.

The registered manager has a level 5 in health and social care, with many years’ experience in the care sector. Management and supervisory staff, particularly the registered manager, were frequently described as approachable, helpful and supportive, with one member of staff saying the registered manager “provides brilliant support.”

Staff told us they valued the regular check in calls from the registered manager. Relatives also commented on supervisory oversight, with one relative explaining, “a supervisor regularly checked staff practice.”

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

Staff told us they felt able and confident to raise any concerns or complaints if required and were aware of the whistleblowing procedures.

We found evidence of staff surveys, supervisions and staff meetings where staff had opportunities to raise any issues or concerns.

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 were supported by the registered manager to address issues around discrimination. We found an example of staff who was appropriately supported when an issue arose. This included ensuring staff did not receive hurtful comments when supporting people and taking appropriate and sensitive action when this occurred.

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. The provider did not always have oversight of some audits and procedures.

The registered manager and management team had good knowledge and oversight of the service, with a range of audits and monitoring in place. However, we found some of the audits were not recorded in detail and needed to be developed further for example the medication audit. During our inspection the registered manager confirmed these had been developed.

We reviewed recruitment files as part of our assessment and found some gaps in the oversight of records at the registered manager level. However, these were promptly addressed and rectified with a new, clear oversight process put in place.

The service had clear lines of accountability with the registered manager being supported by office staff and the Head of Care.

The registered manager also supported a location in the Carlisle area and was able to divide their time accordingly.

We found processes were in place to record any complaints accidents or incidents and that appropriate notifications and referrals were made to other agencies.

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 felt inclusion in local authority reviews of people’s need was important and had established good working relationships with other agencies.

We found evidence of regular collaboration and partnership working with other agencies, for example SALT and district nurses.

The registered manager had introduced an ambulance call out monitoring system. This allowed for any patterns or trends to be identified for individual people. The registered manager explained any trends would be fed back to other relevant agencies or professionals to ensure the person was receiving the most appropriate level of support to ensure they could remain in their own home.

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 and research.

People and relatives were encouraged to share their feedback of the service through regular surveys and reviews. People we spoke to had raised very few concerns about the service overall, and where concerns had been identified, relatives generally felt they had been listened to and issues resolved appropriately.

Staff were also able to give feedback through supervision or staff surveys.