Agincare UK Leominster

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 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 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. Leaders ensured staff understood the values of Agincare UK and put people at the centre of the care they provided. The values were visited regularly during team meetings and supervision.

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. Leaders were knowledgeable and up to date with best practice. They understood the needs of the people the service supported and how to support staff to deliver the best possible care.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Agincare UK had a policy for speaking up which staff could access at any time on the electronic devices they used for record keeping. As well as speaking to management locally, staff could access the head office human resources staff to raise concerns. One staff member said, “on a one-to-one basis I can pick up the phone and ask any questions and there is no comeback as management are always willing to provide support”.

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. Leaders recruited staff from a diverse range of backgrounds and ensured they were trained to meet the needs of the people they supported. Staff were offered opportunities to develop and take on more senior roles within the service. Some staff had been with the service for many years and had benefitted from the opportunities this gave them for career development.

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. Leaders used monthly audits to check the quality of the service provided. For example, reviewing care records to ensure they were relevant and updated so anyone picking up an individual’s care would know what had happened during the previous visit. Leaders used systems which alerted them to any quality or safety concerns. This included identifying if staff were running late for calls, highlighting if care needs had not been delivered and identifying if a medicine had not been given. There were regular spot checks undertaken to review staff practice and observe performance to ensure staff were adhering to the provider’s policies and procedures. One staff member said, “We have spot checks and supervision. I would recommend the agency as the management supports us”. A relative said, “This service is well led and organised. I have no complaints or issues and would recommend 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. Leaders and staff had built good relationships with partners in the care of the people they supported. This included the local authority and health professionals.

The service supported people to be active in their local communities and supported people to access community events as part of their care packages if they wanted to. This was particularly important for people living in the Rose Garden, as extra care service activities often took place in the communal areas.

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 and effective practice. The service was committed to learning and improving staff performance to ensure good quality of care was provided. Leaders were working on continuous improvement. For example, they had been working with the local authority to improve the information they received when they were asked to take on a new package of care.