Voyage (DCA) Swindon

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 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. The provider’s values of safety, effectiveness and experience were echoed in their statement of purpose and demonstrated with their person-centred support of people.

The shared direction of the organisation ensured people were at the centre of their support when decisions about their lives were being made as well as any changes to support plans. This translated to activity planning as well. Staff told us the registered manager and field support managers displayed these values in the way they worked. Values were also displayed in offices.

We did have concerns about some use of language that was not appropriate at times. However, the provider took immediate action to have conversations with staff and identified that refresher training was necessary. For example, ‘My love, darling’ and staff identifying themselves as friends to people was addressed immediately by the registered manager.

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. Feedback demonstrated they did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff told us the registered managers were knowledgeable and provided them with the support they needed to do their job well. The service was focused on supporting complex people to lead active lives as members of their communities.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The registered managers told us the service had speaking up procedures, which staff could use if they needed to. Details of these procedures were shared with staff during their induction, team meetings and supervision sessions. Information was also displayed on noticeboards in the office.

Staff told us they knew how to raise concerns and were confident the management would listen to them and respond. Staff had supported people to assert their rights as tenants, for example, ensuring landlords made repairs to their home in a reasonable time frame.

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. The provider had supported staff to make reasonable adjustments to their working patterns where needed, to support them to remain at work. Staff told us they felt well supported by the management team.

Staff told us that they were treated as individuals by the provider and they felt supported, listened to and encouraged to speak up in team meetings and share ideas. When a person moved into the service, they facilitated training with their relative so the staff could understand how to support them in the way they wanted to be supported.

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.

The management team completed a range of audits and observations of staff practice to monitor the quality of the service. This information was used to plan improvements to the service. The management team fulfilled their duty to ensure they followed all the principles of the Mental Capacity Act where people did not have capacity to consent to their support. The provider assured themselves that they were making best interest decisions which were the least restrictive.

Supervisions were of a good quality with outcomes and learning opportunities clearly identified. Staff had regular, meaningful supervisions.

An annual service report was identified as not working well. There was not enough feedback to show continuous improvement. The provider now facilitates feedback with staff, quality spot checks and staff receive internal awards. Families and professionals can also access a portal to see information relevant to a person while being mindful of General Data Protection Regulations. We saw family invitations to person centred reviews and health meetings.

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 told us they worked with a range of other professionals to help make sure people received continuity in their care, this included handover and transition periods for people coming into and leaving the service.

People and relatives gave examples of the service working in partnership with other agencies.

People were supported to attend clubs and activities of their choice. For example, they attended weekly evening social events. More specialist groups were researched and attendance offered as a means of support to other people from the service. This ensured people could access social events and were not at risk of isolation. People were able to tell us about the activities they are supported to attend and why they enjoy them.

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 researched people’s individual needs so that they could deliver bespoke training to staff.

The provider had developed a model of care aligned to the current best practice guidance ‘right support, right care right culture’. People were enabled to enjoy a full life and be active members of their community. The registered manager had established links with organisations representing people with specific conditions, ensuring they had current information on best practice for supporting people.

The provider had a behaviour support practitioner who supports the services in developing positive behaviour support plans and who will spend time with people observing them and working with them so that they can have a truly individualised support plan.

The registered manager also identified a need for a holistic friendship group but found there were no local groups for people. The registered manager worked hard to develop a provider-led group where not only people who receive a service from the provider can attend but where attendance is encouraged for people who receive a service from different providers.