Verity Healthcare - Haringey

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 Requires Improvement.

This service scored 61 (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 strategic plan for 2025 to 2030 recorded their core values. However, not all staff spoken with were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s ethos and core values or where these were recorded. Following our assessment the registered manager told us the service’s ethos and values were discussed during staff meetings and shared on the staffs’ WhatsApp group chat. The provider told us that the vision, values and strategic priorities of the domiciliary care service were visibly displayed in the office, and all newly employed staff were required to sign an acknowledgement of understanding of the above as part of their induction.

Improvements were required to ensure leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively.

At the time of this assessment there was a registered manager in post with clear management responsibilities and accountability shared between them and the senior leadership team. Staff spoke highly of the registered manager and the support they received. Comments included, “I am supported, and the office staff are very good” and “I appreciate the management team, they support me well.”

However, people were frustrated there were occasions whereby messages left with the registered manager, office staff and support staff were not returned or responded to. A person using the service told us, “Very rarely does the office contact me. When I have contacted them with my concerns, they [office staff] tell me they will speak to the support staff. I never know if it has happened as they don’t call me back with an outcome.” A relative advised us they had raised a query with a member of staff about accessing their family member’s care records as their family member lacked capacity. They told us, “A member of staff told me they would ask the office about customer access to the recording app they [Verity Healthcare – Haringey] use, but I’ve heard nothing further.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up. However, comments from people suggested their voice was not always heard.

Staff felt confident to raise any issues or concerns with the registered manager or senior leadership team. Staff told us they had received regular formal supervision and had the opportunity to participate and attend monthly meetings.Staff spoken with stated they had the opportunity to contribute or raise concerns or suggestions.

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.

There was a diverse workforce at the service, with staff employed from a wide range of backgrounds, cultures, and experiences.Staff told us they were treated fairly, felt supported and valued. Staff told us communication within the organisation was effective.

Though the provider had auditing arrangements in place to monitor the quality of the service, quality assurance and governance arrangements were not effective in monitoring and addressing shortfalls in the service.

Specific information relating to the improvements required as part of this assessment is cited within this report and demonstrated the arrangements for identifying and managing these areas were not as robust as they should be and required improvement. We found not all support plans were consistently accurate or recorded all of a person’s care and support needs. Not all support provided by staff for people using the service was person-centred. Improvements were required relating to medicines management and ensuring staff’s understanding relating to consent to care and treatment was understood. The providers' quality assurance arrangements were not effective in monitoring staff performance, support and ensuring training was embedded. Whilst senior leadership reports indicated the registered manager and senior management team were aware of the above, they had not taken enough action to address these areas and to mitigate the potential risks of people receiving inappropriate care.

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 had arrangements in place to focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement. However, the provider’s oversight arrangements required further embedding to ensure positive outcomes and the safety and welfare of the people they supported.