Mach Care Solutions (Birmingham)

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 Inadequate. 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.

At the last inspection the provider was in breach of legal regulations in relation to good governance, ensuring effective systems to enable them to assess, monitor and

improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of any legal regulations relating to consent.

This service scored 75 (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 had a strong value base and was committed to ensuring each person received a good standard of support.

They said following the previous inspection numbers of people receiving the service had significantly reduced. They had taken this time to focus on improving the quality of the service which included engaging external consultants. These changes had enabled them to assure people a personalised service.

There was a strong culture of promoting people’s rights, and ensuring the person was at the centre of their support. This was regularly discussed during staff meetings and supervision sessions. Staff confirmed there was an open, supportive culture and enjoyed working for the company.

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 was involved in the service on a day-to-day basis. They knew people, their relatives and staff well, and expected good quality support to be provided.

Staff were very complimentary about the registered manager. They said they had supervisions and were observed in people’s homes but could also call into the office for a chat at any time. Staff told us the registered manager was very supportive and was always available for advice.

Staff were offered flexible leave, paid compassionate leave, and recognition initiatives such as worker of the month. Breaks were embedded into rotas and working time regulations (including rest periods) were followed.

Staff struggling at work was actively identified and those staff received tailored support. For example, management provided financial advances or adjusted rotas for childcare needs. These measures positively impacted care quality.

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

People told us they would have no hesitation in raising a concern if needed. They said they would tell a member of staff or ring the office to speak to the registered manager. People were confident they would be listened to, and their concern would be satisfactorily resolved.

Staff told us the registered manager had an open-door policy. They said they could raise concerns at any time with the registered manager or other staff in the office. One staff member told us they “had never had to raise any concerns but I amalways asked if I have anything I want to talk about.” Other staff told us they completed staff surveys and always asked by the manager for suggestions or feedback.

There was a whistleblowing policy, which was initially discussed with staff during their induction. A separate company was used to advise the registered manager on any human resources issues. This ensured accurate and unbiased procedures were followed as needed.

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.

Records demonstrated staff had received training in equality and diversity. Overseas staff had received additional support with understanding regionalism. We saw the service had supported some staff to learn to drive to enable them to be more independent.

The registered manager told us they had a diverse staff team with different skills and experiences. There were staff of different ages, genders and individuality was respected.

Diversity and inclusion were promoted, with workforce matching to service user demographics. However, leaders acknowledged they had encountered challenges in attracting white British applicants to better reflect the local population. This was something they were working towards.

The provider had clear systems setting out roles, responsibilities and how governance should be managed. This supported staff to deliver person-centred support.

The provider acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider had robust quality assurance systems in place to monitor care and support ongoing improvements to the service. They had engaged with an external auditor to provide additional assurances and identified themes and trends in audits taking action to address any shortfalls.

Action was taken when audits identified the need for improvement. Records were retained securely and confidentially.

Staff were well supported with additional training and work life balance. This meant morale was good, as was staff retention.

Staff, people and their relatives had confidence in the leadership of the service.

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 worked in partnership with other agencies, and this ensured positive outcomes for people. Staff shared information with healthcare professionals to support any changes to care.

Care records evidenced the provider worked with external professionals and responded to any recommendations.

The registered manager worked in partnership with their staff team and the people using the service, in planning and delivering care.

The registered manager knew who to contact if people required additional support from other healthcare professionals such as GPs, dietitians and social workers.

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 provider had a clear plan for the future that included improvements and lessons learnt from previous issues. They told us they felt equipped to safely grow the service. The provider supported staff to undertake a wide range of training and to access information about best practice. The leadership team and staff spoke with pride about the service and the quality of care delivered to people.