Guild Care Domiciliary Care

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 since they reregistered. 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 clearly defined vision and set of organisational values, which were embedded within recruitment, training and day-to-day practice.

The registered manager showed a focused approach in ensuring people received good quality care. Staff were recruited based on alignment with these values, and leadership promoted a culture focused on compassion, inclusion and continuous improvement. Strategic developments, including the implementation of a new rostering system and plans for service expansion, showed that leaders were actively working to improve the service and respond to emerging needs. One staff member said, “(The registered manager) leads us very well. It's how she deals with things - she asks how we are going to learn from things. She has this aura around her. Always wants the best for the clients and staff. Always looking at ways to improve the service.”

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.

The service had a structured management team with clearly defined roles, including a Head of Service, care coordinators, field care supervisors and a compliance function. This provided a framework for oversight and support across the service. Leadership capacity had been strengthened through recruitment and organisational restructuring, which improved responsiveness and ensured that operational responsibilities were shared. This meant leaders were better able to manage risks and maintain service delivery.

Leaders were committed to supporting staff and promoting inclusive practices, particularly through training and workforce initiatives. Records showed that consistent and regular supervisions and appraisals were undertaken, while staff meetings were held so staff could provide feedback and contribute. Managers and staff understood the diverse needs of the people they supported. One relative said, “They are pleasant and they seem to work together well, and they do seem to care.”

Staff felt that leaders were approachable, knowledgeable and active in the delivery of person-centered care. One staff member said, “They really know the clients themselves and are not just sitting in an office, they are hands on and experienced in all aspects of the job.” Another staff member said, “Home care management is very approachable and friendly, they do go the extra mile to provide high quality standard care.”

The leadership team encouraged an open service and office where staff could raise any issues about care and their roles. Staff and leaders acted with openness, honesty and transparency.

The provider had systems in place to support openness and encourage staff to raise concerns, including policies, staff feedback mechanisms and opportunities to contribute through staff voice groups. These processes indicated that the organisation recognised the importance of listening to staff and promoting a culture where concerns could be shared. This provided assurances for staff on the protection and support they will receive should they need to raise concerns.

Staff told us they were able to raise any concerns, and they were confident that actions would be taken. One staff member said, “I find it very easy to feedback to office staff and feel confident that any concerns raised by any of us out in the community are addressed and resolved whenever possible.” Another staff member said, “We are very transparent and open.”

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

The provider demonstrated a structured approach to equality, diversity and inclusion within the workforce. Staff received mandatory training, and additional initiatives such as inclusion groups and awareness sessions supported understanding of protected characteristics. Recruitment processes were designed to be fair and inclusive, and leaders took steps to ensure staff from diverse backgrounds felt supported.

Leaders made reasonable adjustments to support staff to carry out their roles well, such as adapted working arrangements. Staff spoke positively about the consideration of leaders to their personal circumstances and willingness to make adjustments to support them.

There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements. Staff understood their role and responsibilities.

Leaders had oversight over the quality of support being provided. The provider had a range of governance and quality assurance systems in place to monitor service performance. These included audits of care plans, incidents, medicines and mental health, as well as oversight from a compliance team and internal inspection processes. These governance systems enabled leaders to identify issues and act promptly, ensuring care quality and safety were maintained. Regular reviews, daily monitoring of care records and structured communication systems supported oversight of care delivery. This meant that leaders had access to information about the quality of the service and could identify issues in a timely way. One person said, “(Senior staff member) comes a few times with the care plan and ask if it needs to be adjusted.”

A review of statutory notifications was completed prior to on-site assessment. These confirmed that the provider had met their legal responsibility to notify authorities of incidents. A notification is the action that a provider is legally bound to take to tell us about changes to their regulated services or notifiable incidents that have taken place in them.

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 service demonstrated effective partnership working with a wide range of external professionals and organisations. Staff worked closely with healthcare providers, specialist teams and community services to ensure people received coordinated and responsive care. Examples included joint working with SALT, occupational therapists and palliative care services, which supported improved outcomes and reduced risks such as hospital admission. Appropriate referrals for specialist and health support were made where relevant and needed.

The provider also engaged with community initiatives to enhance people’s wellbeing and reduce social isolation. Links with community services enabled people to access additional support and opportunities, contributing to improved quality of life.

The leadership had shown a consistent and positive approach to improving the quality of care.

Robust and consistent quality assurance systems and audits had been used to identify issues, and learning was used to drive service improvements and customer experiences. Processes were in place to ensure learning when things go wrong. Systems were in place for staff to report and record any accidents and incidents, while appropriate actions had been taken for each event.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to learning and improvement, with evidence of changes made in response to feedback and reflection. For example, policies were adapted following concerns raised by people using the service, and improvements were made to documentation processes after identifying gaps. The provider also identified and responded to wider challenges, such as delays in external services and increasing complexity of people’s needs. Steps were taken to mitigate risks, including interim risk assessments and increased coordination with partner agencies. This responsive approach to learning meant the service continually improved and adapted to people’s needs.

Staff spoke positively about the providers support for their development and to improve. One staff member said, “There's always room for development in Guild Care and they always promote that and opportunity.” Another staff member told us, “I know I can grow and learn at Guild care and I'm really enjoying my role as a care assistant working in the community.”