Apace Support 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 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 registered manager told us they had an open-door policy, and the staff could contact them at any time. Staff confirmed this was the case. Staff team meetings were held so information could be shared and the provider worked collaboratively with people and their relatives. The provider supported staff’s equality and diversity, for example through shifts allowing staff time off for religious festivals.
 

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 service had a registered manager in place who was supported in the day to day running by a deputy manager. The registered manager told us the received good support from the owner of the company. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and the support they received. A member of staff said, “[Registered manager] is an open person. They are always ready to help when needed.” Another staff member told us, “It’s a good company. The [registered] manager is very good and very transparent.”

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

Relatives told us they had regular contact with the registered manager. They said they had never had to raise a concern, but felt confident that if they did it would be responded to appropriately. A relative told us, “I don’t have any complaints about them. But I believe [registered manager] would sort out any problems.” Although the provider had not received any complaints at the time of inspection, there was a complaints procedure in place which set out a formal process to responding to any complaints made.
 

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 told us they promoted workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. For example, they said they provided flexible shift patterns for staff to work around religious festivals. Staff recruitment was carried out in line with good practice in relation to equalities legislation. Policies were in place to guide practice in this area, including an equality and diversity policy.

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.

Various quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place. For example, the registered manager carried out a monthly ‘Care Quality Audit’. These covered areas including care plans, safeguarding and infection prevention and control to help ensure good practice. Staff meetings were held so staff could provide feedback on the service. Surveys had been carried out for people, we saw these contained positive feedback. One person had commented,” Staff are polite and helpful.”

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.

As the provider had only been operational in supporting people with personal care since February 2026, there had not been much opportunity for collaborative working with other agencies. However, the provider was a member of a trade association for care providers which they said provided them with updates in the care sector. They also worked with Skills for Care to help deliver training to their staff. Both the registered manager and nominated individual told us they attended provider forums run by the local authority.

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.

The registered manager told us of some of their plans for future developments. These included implementing an electronic system for recording medicines to be used in the event of them supporting people with medicines, and developing new ways to support staff and people to provide feedback on the service. The registered manager also told us they planned to introduce spot checks to monitor that care was provided appropriately.