Mercury Care Services Ltd

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

Staff were given a handbook which included the provider’s mission statement, a set of values, a code of conduct and instructions for how to raise concerns. The provider carried out regular staff meetings to discuss issues and improve practice.

One member of staff told us, “I am happy working there.” Another member of staff said, “Yes, I am happy working there, I love my team members and my managers.” One other staff member told us, “Yes, I am happy working there.”

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.

A person told us, “They [the registered manager] seem really nice. They are always ready to fix any problems. There are hardly any problems though.” A person’s relative said, “I have spoken to the manger and whoever else is in the office. I think the service is very good.”

A member of staff told us, “They are good, not bad, the management is good. So far, my requests have been granted. They are supportive.” The registered manager said, “We work with staff if they have child-care needs, we are flexible, we arrange the rota to suit them and their child-care needs.”

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

People and their relatives told us they felt comfortable to raise concerns.

A person said, “Whatever concerns I’ve had, I’ve spoken to the registered manager about it.” Another person told us, “If I want to ask any questions I ring them.”

A member of staff said, “Yes, I feel very comfortable to raise issues. I feel listened to and supported.” Another member of staff told us, “Yes, so far so good. I have the registered manager’s personal number and if there are any issues I can speak to her personally, or to my line manager.” One other staff member said, “Yes, I feel comfortable to raise concerns, when I call the office, they don't make you feel like 'why are you raising this', they are supportive.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce and they worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

They had a diverse workforce and staff told us they felt well treated and were happy working there. The provider was flexible and inclusive and arranged the rota to meet staff members’ individual circumstances and needs, for example.

The provider had quality assurance systems and processes in place and audited different aspects of the service regularly. However, some of their audits were not always effective, and the provider had not always acted effectively on the best information about performance.

The provider’s audits had not identified the issues we found regarding medicines administration; care call punctuality, including care calls requiring 2 members of staff; care plans; oral health assessments and record keeping. The provider had been made aware of punctuality issues by people and their families and had discussed it with staff in team meetings, supervision and spot-checks. However, at the time of our assessment, evidence showed care call punctuality had not sufficiently improved for all people. We found no evidence anyone had been harmed or adversely affected by these issues.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability and staff and management understood their roles and duties. There was a business continuity contingency plan in place in case of emergencies affecting the service.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The service regularly worked with GPs, district nurses, occupational therapists, dietitians, pharmacies and hospitals, for example.

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 registered manager was part of a group run by Skills for Care. The group had meetings and an online platform where registered managers discussed issues, shared ideas, supported each other with information and advice and participated in training. The provider also attended a local authority forum for adult social care providers and took part in training it provided. Skills for Care is a workforce development organisation for adult social care in England that works toensure the sector has the right people, skills, and support to deliver high-quality care.