Domiciliary Care Services (UK) 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 68 (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.

Feedback from people and family members reflected a service that had an open culture, which was committed to engagement and supporting people’s diversity. A family member told us, “The office staff are very professional, they are quick to answer and resolve and queries. They are absolutely fantastic.”

Staff were supported through regular supervision and staff meetings. Staff spoke positively about their experience of working at the service and were complimentary as to the support they received from the management team. A member of staff told us, “Management always available, welcoming and open.”

Reasonable adjustments or additional support were considered by the provider, where a staff member had a particular need which may affect their ability to undertake their role.

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 and management team were experienced, knowledgeable and supportive of the delivery of high-quality care. The registered manager was knowledgeable about issues and priorities that were required to deliver good quality care.

Positive feedback was shared with staff as to what is working well, which included feedback from colleagues, people, family members and other professionals.

Policies and procedures outlined the provider’s commitment to quality of care and culture of the organisation.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staffs’ understanding of the providers whistle-blowing policy was limited.

People, family members and staff were confident to speak up about any concerns, all expressed confidence in the leadership of the service. A person told us, “I’ve never had to complain about anything but feel confident to do so.”

The provider had a whistle-blowing policy and procedure. Staff told us if they had any concerns they would speak with a member of the management team who they had confidence in. A member of staff told us, “At meetings they always advise us to speak up.” We found some staff had limited awareness of external organisations they could approach with concerns. It is important all staff have the knowledge and understanding of the provider’s policy, to fully support a positive culture.

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 registered manager celebrated the diversity of the workforce recognising the value and importance a diverse staff team had on achieving positive outcomes for people using the service and their families.

The provider’s systems of governance did not always identify areas to enhance performance and monitor outcomes. The provider had clear responsibilities and systems of accountability, to provide good quality and sustainable care, which was shared with others when appropriate.

A system of governance and management was in place, which measured performance and risk, identifying areas for development and growth, which were incorporated into the provider’s business improvement plan. However, we found areas of improvement, not identified by the provider during our assessment of the service, which would strengthen safe and good quality care for people. The management team responded to our feedback and made improvements during the assessment process, which included the development of a care plan for an aspect of a person’s care.

The provider had brought about improvement in response to the previous inspection of the service, which included risk management in key aspects of people’s care, and medicine management and recording.

Quality monitoring of the service included seeking the views of people and family members about the care and support they received. A person told us, “They send out a questionnaire every six months to get my feedback, and I get a visit by a supervisor every six months. In addition, regular checks on safety and the standard of care were carried out through the monitoring of staff, which included supervision and observed practice.

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, management team and staff worked collaboratively with partner agencies, such as external healthcare and social care professionals. This approach enabled the staff team to learn from wider expertise and ensure co-ordinated support for people.

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.

People and family members expressed confidence in the quality of the service, and when asked did not identify any areas for improvement. A family member told us, “They are very good, and I can’t see what they could improve.”

The registered manager demonstrated their commitment to continuous improvement, underpinned by their Business Improvement Plan. There was evidence of improvements, which included investment in an electronic care management system, and working with the company to make changes to meet the needs of the business.

Staff were provided with ongoing refresher training which contributed to the continuous delivery of safe quality care. Staff were positive in their feedback about managers. They told us they were afforded enough time to complete training and had been shadowed by experienced staff until they were assessed as competent to undertake their role independently.

We were satisfied with the registered manager’s approach to learning and improvement. They were receptive in their response to our observations and feedback during the assessment.