Home Instead Leigh

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 since the office location changed and the service was re-registered. 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 provider’s vison and aims for the service were documented within their statement of purpose. One of their core aims was to provide high quality person centred care to people.

Feedback from people and relatives indicated they were very happy with the service being provided and would recommend the service to others. Comments included, “It’s the first time I've had a care company where all the staff, carers and office staff alike are wonderful, they sound like they are enjoying the day, you ask them to do something and you know it’s going to get done” and “I would certainly recommend them. It’s the best company I have had.”

Staff all had a shared direction and purpose, which was fulfilling the provider’s aims of providing good quality care. The culture of the organisation supported this. One staff member stated, “I enjoy working here. It is a friendly, fulfilling, kind, compassionate and understanding service.” Another staff stated, “When one of our clients passed away my boss rang me to explain the situation. They were very understanding of how this news may affect my feelings and mental well-being and said that she would be there if I needed to talk about anything.”

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.

People and relatives spoke positively about the service, how it was run and the registered manager themselves. A person told us, “I know [Registered manager] she’s very good, I speak to her at least once a week.” A relative stated, “I was impressed by Home Instead from the start. [Registered manager] is very thorough. I continue to be impressed with her and all her staff. [Registered manager] is completely hands on. The standards come from the top.”

Staff were also complimentary about management and the support they received. One stated, “When I had personal issues, [Registered manager] supported me tremendously throughout that time.” Another told us, “I feel management support all staff, there is open communication. When feedback is received from a client or their family this is shared. I feel they listen, if a concern is raised there is something done about it quickly.”

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

The provider had up to date policies and procedures in place, which provided guidance for staff on how to speak up and raise any concerns. Similarly, people and relatives told us they had no qualms about speaking to staff or the Registered manager, to voice any issues, though the majority had not needed to. Where people had reported minor concerns, these had been addressed quickly and effectively.

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 surveys included sections which covered equality and diversity and how staff were feeling. These included the following two statements; I am treated fairly regardless of race, gender, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other differences and I can be my true self at work. Over 90% of staff confirmed these statements were accurate, with the remainder stating they neither agreed nor disagreed.

Each staff member also had a personal development plan, to support them to achieve any goals or ambitions. Sections included what staff wanted to be able to do better, how would they recognise success, how would they achieve their objectives and how would they put what they had achieve / learned into practice.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance.

The provider had a governance policy in place, which indicated what audits and monitoring should be completed and how often. The policy indicated ‘franchise owner audits’ should be done quarterly. These covered all aspects of service delivery, including client records, staff files, training and supervision, and governance. However, we were only provided with one audit dated February 2025, so could not be assured they had been completed every 3 months.

Weekly checks had been completed of activity records, daily care notes and medication records, to ensure these had been completed fully and accurately. From examples of monitoring and oversight provided, it was not clear how often or when care plans and accident and incident records were audited. We identified some issues with both of these during the assessment, which should have been picked up through internal processes.

The national office of Home Instead also completed auditing of each franchise, to ensure they were meeting the required standards to continue being a franchisee. We reviewed the last 2 completed for Home Instead Leigh, the first of which had identified a number of shortfalls, including with record keeping, staff files and office operations, with each area being categorised as non-compliant. On the follow up audit we noted all areas of concern had been addressed and the service was deemed fully compliant. This indicated systems and processes were in place to drive improvements, albeit they were not documented consistently.

The provider clearly understood and carried out their duty to collaborate and worked in partnership, and services worked seamlessly for people. They always shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

We noted some exceptional evidence of partnership working and involvement of the service within the wider community. The provider was in the process of setting up a carer’s wellbeing event, aimed at all carers both professionals and family members, within the local area. This was due to be held on 11 June 2025. The aim was to provide an opportunity for carers to meet up, get advice and share stories. The provider had arranged for a number of other organisations to attend, to help with providing support and advice, including respiratory nurses, Be-Well Wigan, Citizens Advice Bureau, dementia advisors and Healthwatch. They had also arranged for the local Mayor to attend.

The provider had also set up and operated an initiative, called ‘generational gamers’. This involved visiting local care homes and day centres to provide leisure opportunities to people using video games and virtual reality devices. These sessions provided meaningful engagement, cognitive stimulation, and opportunities for physical activity in an accessible and enjoyable format. The NHS was currently running a 4-week trial of this service at a mental health hospital in Leigh. The trial aimed to assess the therapeutic and cognitive benefits of gaming in inpatient settings.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. However, they encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcomes and quality of life for people.

A number of individual actions plans were shared by the provider, linked to audits or monitoring which had been completed, specifically franchise owner audits, national office audits and what the provider had titled ‘action planning tools’. However, the action plans provided were only partially completed, for example the actions required sections were sometimes blank, limited updates on progress had been documented, nor had actions been consistently signed off as completed.

The provider did not currently use an overarching improvement plan on which all actions which needed to be completed were documented to help ensure effective oversight. As such, whilst national office auditing had identified improvements had been made, and feedback from people, relatives and staff was positive, record keeping to show what actions or improvements had been made, and what lessons had been learned during this process required improvement.