Together We Care 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. This is the first assessment of this 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 management team and staff demonstrated a commitment to person-centred care and improving outcomes for people. The vision and values of the service were clearly detailed in the Statement of Purpose. The vision for ongoing service development was regularly discussed in one to one and team meetings with staff. The registered manager demonstrated the service values. Comments included, “We love to help people. That is why we are here.”

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 had the skills and commitment to support the service. There was a focus on genuine, positive outcomes for people, the development of staff and the quality of the service. The registered manager was visible. The service was small and the management team supported with care visits regularly. We received some mixed feedback about responsiveness from relatives when they contacted the office. Some relatives referred to delays in getting a response, but people and relatives said there had been recent improvements in this area. Staff gave positive feedback about the support they received from the registered manager. Comments included, “It is really good, very helpful managers. I think it is well managed.”

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

The provider had a whistleblowing policy in place, which included clear guidance to support staff to ‘speak up’. Staff understood the processes to follow, should they have any concerns. The provider also had a dedicated post box at the office and encouraged staff to give feedback.

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 employed a diverse staff team. Human resource policies were in place to ensure staff understood their rights as an employee. All staff completed training in equality and diversity. The recruitment process was fair and inclusive, with health questionnaires completed to ensure the provider was aware of any reasonable adjustments required to support staff. Staff told us they were treated fairly and kindly.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and improving governance arrangements. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support.

Some audits and checks were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Detailed audits had also been conducted by an external consultant, commissioned by the provider. The registered manager confirmed care records and call monitoring audits had been carried out but not always recorded. There had been a reliance on more detailed audits conducted externally. The provider had recently developed a more detailed suite of audits to monitor quality and safety more robustly. This was newly in place and required embedding by the management team to ensure they fulfilled their regulatory responsibilities in maintaining effective and timely oversight of the service. The service had an overarching action plan which highlighted action was taken when any shortfalls were identified. The provider had policies in place, which were regularly reviewed.

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 collaborated with the local authority who commissioned care. The registered manager demonstrated they valued and welcomed partnership working. We received positive feedback from allied professionals. Comments included, “I am really pleased to be working alongside an organisation that shares the same values around quality, stability, and doing the right thing for the people we support.”

The registered manager was a member of the local management forum and welcomed this as a way of sharing ideas and an opportunity for learning.

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.

There was a culture of learning and improvement. Staff expressed a pride in working for the service and in the care and support they provided. The management team demonstrated their understanding of quality performance and regulatory requirements and were passionate about growing the business. There were plans in place to further develop electronic systems which supported the service. The provider was developing plans to ensure they could offer a service to people with more diverse needs. They were also developing software to enable relatives and people to give more immediate and spontaneous feedback on their care.

The provider was responsive to feedback throughout the assessment process.