Austen Allen Homecare - East Kent

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 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 provider demonstrated a culture focused on safety, learning and person‑centred care, supported by clear governance systems. People were very positive about the service, with one person stating, “I am very happy with the service and I would recommend it,” and another saying, “As long as nothing changes, we will remain very happy.” This demonstrated that people experienced consistent, good quality care and were satisfied with the support they received.

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. Leaders were visible and active in overseeing care delivery. Management involvement was evident through unannounced spot checks, probation reviews, supervision and audits. Where issues were identified, leaders responded proportionately and constructively, providing guidance and support rather than punitive measures. The management team were visible within the service, with one person stating, “She also attends care calls as a working member of staff.” The registered manager had been in the organisation for over 12 years and started as a carer, which provided them with a strong understanding of the challenges faced by staff. This demonstrated compassionate and capable leadership and ensured staff were supported to deliver consistent care.

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

Staff were supported to raise concerns and seek guidance. Supervision and probation records showed staff were encouraged to escalate concerns appropriately and were assessed on their judgement and awareness of when to seek support. Staff meetings and follow‑up actions demonstrated concerns were listened to and addressed, supporting an open and safe culture.

Staff felt able to speak openly with management and said they received support when concerns were raised. People also said they would have no issues raising concerns and described the manager as approachable and responsive. One person told us, “The manager is very approachable and always returns emails or phone calls as soon as she can,” and another said, “I would be happy to raise a concern. I find the manager very approachable.” This ensured concerns were raised and addressed promptly, reducing risks to people.

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.

Supervision, appraisal and probation processes were applied consistently across staff. Staff were treated fairly through structured review and development processes, and there was no evidence of discriminatory practice. This ensured an inclusive working 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.

Governance systems were well established and effective. A wide range of audits were completed, covering training, supervision, medicines, equipment, call monitoring and delegated clinical tasks. These identified risks and areas for improvement, with actions recorded and followed up. Review cycles and oversight arrangements ensured ongoing management control and sustainability.

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 healthcare professionals and community services to support safe and effective care. Referrals were made where required and information was shared to support coordinated care. This ensured people received care that was consistent and met their needs.

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.

Learning from incidents, audits, supervision and feedback was embedded into practice. Improvements focused on strengthening existing systems, including reinforcing staff guidance, enhancing oversight and refining monitoring processes. This showed the service reviewed and improved practice over time.