Thames Homecare Service 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. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 64 (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 clear visions and values in place, which focused on providing people with independence, improving people's confidence with daily living skills and providing dignified care, which met people's needs. Staff told us they worked well together as a team and the culture amongst the team was positive, to enable them to provide good care to people. A staff member said, “I would be happy for my relative to receive care from this service. Staff are supported. All the managers are supportive. Staff are happy. We also get discount cards for shopping.” However, improvements were required to some care records, to provide staff with up to date guidance about people's needs and wishes.

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. We received positive feedback from people, relatives, staff and partner professionals about the leadership of the service. A relative said, “We had a meeting about three weeks ago with the line manager and the social worker. There has always been a good level of communication.” A staff member said, “I enjoy my work, as I always get support directly from the management team. I believe we support people to our best.” Business continuity plans were in place, to guide staff about what to do in emergency events, such as staffing shortages. The provider’s statement of purpose detailed the services offered and the aims and objectives of the service.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. There were clear policies and procedures in place to enable staff to whistle-blow on poor practice. Staff told us they felt comfortable to raise concerns and action would be taken to address concerns. People and relatives told us they could contact the office easily and they were listened to. A person said, “They (leadership team) call me and ask for my feedback.” And a relative said, “We are really happy with the support. The office check in and visit personally once or twice a month.”

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 received regular supervisions, where their personal development was explored. Staff were involved in weekly meetings, where they could share ideas, concerns and suggestions. Staff told us they were treated fairly, and no one had been subject to any discrimination. A staff member said, “Thames always goes above and beyond for their clients, but also with supporting staff. I know if I have a problem in my personal life I can go to them, and they will help me if they can. We share ideas and suggestions.”

The provider had oversight of the service and completed regular overarching quality audits. Some improvements were required, to ensure governance systems recognised concerns we found during our assessment. Audit systems were in place in relation to monitoring medicines, staff practice, daily records, IPC, communication and finances. However, audit systems were not robust in identifying shortfalls we found in relation to care plans and risk assessments. We could not be assured care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed or audited. Following our assessment the provider gave us assurances and provided evidence to us of improved recording systems, which would improve the assessments of people’s needs and provide more robust care plans for staff guidance.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. We received positive feedback from partners who worked with the service. A professional said, “It would be my pleasure to inform you how wonderful Thames Homecare are. They have supported several of my clients from culturally diverse backgrounds in the recent past with great, care, compassion and very much a person-centred approach. My clients have always given positive feedback about the service.” People were supported to maintain relationships with their family and friends. Where required, people were supported to access the community and be involved in community projects, such as dementia cafes, day centres and libraries.

The provider had an ongoing quality improvement plan in place, to enable them to drive improvements of the service. This had recently included improvements made in relation to community engagement, medicines wastage and training. Whilst we found feedback surveys were in place for people using the service, and were used to improve people's care, this could further be improved by gaining feedback from relatives, staff and professionals who worked with the service.