Prospect Health Living Care Services Limited

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. 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 registered manager was knowledgeable about their regulatory responsibilities and about their priorities for the development of the service. Staff overall were positive about the culture of the service and staff morale. One staff member told us, “Staff morale is generally high. We have a supportive team culture where we help each other out.”

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. Systems and processes were in place to provide support to staff and promote a positive, open and inclusive culture. Overall staff told us that they felt supported and Prospect Health Living Care Services Limited was a good place to work.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The provider had clear policies and procedures in place to support people in speaking up and raising concerns. These included up-to-date safeguarding and whistleblowing policies, which were accessible and regularly reviewed to ensure compliance with best practice and regulatory standards. Staff demonstrated awareness of these policies and understood the processes for reporting concerns, including how to access guidance and support when needed. Staff told us they felt able to speak up. One staff member told us, “Yes I feel comfortable raising concerns and believe management takes feedback seriously and acts on it when needed.” People and their relatives said they felt if they raised an issue, they would be heard, and it would be acted on. They felt able to approach and speak with the registered manager and staff. One relative told us, “I can call [Name of registered manager]. They are so approachable and they will do anything. They’ve never refused a request in 18 months.”

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 had policies and procedures in place regarding equality, diversity and inclusion and staff had received training on equality and diversity. Staff told us the felt valued and treated with respect and that the registered manager fostered an inclusive and fair environment.

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. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. However, although the service had structures in place to monitor and improve the quality of care, most of the systems used were individualised and did not currently provide service level oversight. Audit systems required revision to provide stronger oversight particularly as the service expands, to enable more effective identification and analysis of themes and trends. One care plan needed further detail to guide staff and mitigate the risk of choking and further detail was needed for some people around capacity. Completion of training modules for some staff also needed improvement and processes for safe recruitment needed making more robust. These areas were actioned immediately by the registered manager. The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities to notify partners. For example, notifications to CQC and safeguarding alerts were submitted when required. No safeguarding alerts had been required during the period reviewed. The provider had a business continuity plan which detailed how they would be prepared for emergencies.

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 committed to improving the service and open to suggestions for improvement, recognising the importance of joint working with a range of partner agencies. Advice was sought from partners, and referrals were made in a timely manner which allowed continuity of care.

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. The registered manager told us about their plans and ways in which they were looking to improve and grow the service and improve outcomes for people. The registered manager was keen to link with partners, network and link with statutory training opportunities to further expand staff knowledge and experience. Policies and procedures reflected best practice and were accessible to all staff. Feedback was actively sought from people, relatives, and staff through surveys to improve the quality of care. One person told us when asked if anything could be made better with the service, “No, I really don’t. The way it is managed, even the neighbours say they can’t believe how on time they are. They are so on the ball and meticulous.”