Hope Care Agency

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

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 improved to good.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Theproviderwas previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. Improvements were found at this assessment, and theproviderwas no longer in breach of this regulation.

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, equality, diversity, inclusion, engagement and an understanding of the needs of people using the service.

Since the last assessment, leaders had focused on improving the quality of care, strengthening governance systems and developing a culture of continuous improvement. During this assessment, leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of those previous failings and the actions taken to address them.

The registered manager described the service's improvement journey and told us, “We have worked hard to change the forms and update our systems so that we can do better." There was evidence of improvements in care planning, risk assessment processes, medicines management oversight and quality assurance arrangements.

Leaders had established regular communication arrangements and promoted a culture where staff were encouraged to contribute to service development. The registered manager explained, “We meet our staff once a month to discuss what is going on." This supported shared understanding of priorities and promoted a culture of engagement and improvement.

People benefitted from a service that was focused on improving outcomes and learning from previous concerns. The provider demonstrated a commitment to sustaining improvements and maintaining a person-centred approach to care delivery

The provider had inclusive leaders who understood the context in which care and support were delivered and who had the skills, knowledge and experience required to lead effectively.

Leaders had a good understanding of the people using the service, their needs and the improvements required following the Warning Notice. The registered manager showed insight into previous shortcomings and was able to describe in detail the actions taken to strengthen governance, improve care planning and increase management oversight.

Staff described leaders as approachable and supportive. Managers maintained visibility within the service and promoted regular communication with staff. Staff also had opportunities to raise concerns, discuss practice issues and request additional training through supervision and appraisal arrangements.

Relatives spoke positively about leaders within the service. One relative told us, “I have met the managers. They come and speak to the staff and they ask for feedback.” This indicated managers maintained visibility within the service and sought feedback about people's experiences.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt able to speak up and where concerns and feedback were listened to.

Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns with managers and described leaders as approachable and responsive. The service had whistleblowing and safeguarding policies, and staff demonstrated awareness of reporting arrangements. Managers encouraged open communication through supervision, meetings and ongoing contact with staff.

The registered manager described regular communication with staff and explained that concerns and issues were discussed through monthly meetings and supervision arrangements. Staff also had opportunities to provide feedback regarding the service and suggest improvements.

People and relatives also had the opportunity to raise concerns or provide feedback. Welfare calls and reviews enabled managers to gather views about the quality of care and take action where concerns were identified.

There was evidence of a culture in which feedback was valued, and concerns were used to support service improvement.

The provider valued diversity within its workforce and worked towards an inclusive and fair culture.

Policies reviewed included equality, diversity and inclusion arrangements designed to support fair treatment of staff and promote an inclusive working environment. Managers had an understanding of workforce wellbeing and the need to support staff appropriately.

The provider's workforce reflected a diverse range of backgrounds and cultures. Staff received mandatory training that included equality and diversity components and managers promoted respectful working relationships throughout the organisation.

Staff told us they felt supported and described positive relationships with managers. The provider promoted a culture of fairness and respect which supported staff to deliver person-centred care

The provider had established effective governance systems that supported the delivery of safe, person-centred and sustainable care. Leaders had strengthened oversight of quality, risk and performance since the Warning Notice and demonstrated improved accountability across the service.

The provider had introduced a comprehensive programme of audits, including care plan audits, medicines audits, PRN medicines audits, infection prevention and control audits, spot checks and staff competency assessments. These enabled leaders to identify issues, take corrective action and monitor improvement.

Leaders maintained effective oversight of care planning and risk management. Records reviewed showed care plans and risk assessments had been significantly improved and now provided detailed guidance for staff. Managers regularly reviewed documentation to ensure information remained accurate, reflected people's current needs and supported safe care delivery.

The provider had strengthened oversight of specialist care. They had developed detailed risk assessments and care planning for people who required support with diabetes management, PEG feeding and moving and handling. Staff had received specialist training and competency assessments, and leaders monitored compliance through supervision, audits and training systems.

In response to the Warning Notice, leaders had reviewed governance processes, revised documentation, strengthened training oversight and implemented additional quality assurance measures. Records demonstrated these actions had been embedded into practice and were subject to ongoing monitoring.

Evidence from audits, care records, training records, staff feedback and people's experiences demonstrated sustained improvement since the previous assessment. Improvements had reduced risks, strengthened governance oversight and provided assurance that the provider was continuously monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service.

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 with a range of healthcare professionals including GPs, district nurses, occupational therapists, dietitians and speech and language therapists where required. Care planning reflected healthcare recommendations and evidenced collaborative working to support positive outcomes.

Managers described maintaining contact with healthcare professionals when concerns were identified and working collaboratively to ensure people received safe and effective support. The provider also worked with families, involving them in reviews and discussions regarding care and support arrangements.

The provider's approach to partnership working supported continuity of care and enabled people to access the support and healthcare services they required. Information from partner agencies was incorporated into care planning and risk assessments.

A relative confirmed the provider worked alongside healthcare professionals, and they were involved in their relative’s care. They told us, “Nurse comes regularly and we get advice from them. They come when needed.” This reflected collaborative working with external professionals to support people's health needs.

organisation and local system. They encouraged approaches that promoted positive experiences, outcomes and quality of life for people receiving support.

The provider had reviewed and strengthened systems since the previous assessment. Improvements included revised documentation, enhanced staff training compliance, greater medicines oversight, the introduction of additional audits and the development of more detailed care plans and risk assessments. These changes were evident throughout the records and governance systems reviewed during the assessment and demonstrated a sustained focus on service improvement.

Quality assurance arrangements had been expanded, and leaders used audits, welfare calls, supervision, spot checks and care reviews to monitor performance and identify opportunities for further improvement. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was used to inform service development and support ongoing learning.

Overall, the provider demonstrated a clear commitment to continuous learning and service development. Changes implemented following the previous assessment had been embedded into practice and contributed to stronger oversight, safer care and improved outcomes for people receiving support.