Intrinsic 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

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 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager promoted a clear, shared vision and culture based on transparency, equity, inclusion, and human rights. However, this was not always evident within the staff team.

Several staff members had recently left the service due to their discriminatory attitudes and behaviours which indicated that the registered manager was not always fully aware of the underlying culture within the staff team. The registered manager said, “I am so upset about it. When you meet people you have an expectation. I wondered if I had missed something.”

Despite this recent event overall there was a positive, caring culture within Intrinsic Care. Senior staff in the office spoke fondly about people and had a good understanding of people’s needs. They took time each week to visit various supported living settings to spend time with people. There was a clear drive to support people back into the community to enable them to live fulfilling lives.

Although the provider had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. We identified areas where improvement was needed.

Several attempts to make contact with the registered manager and the office prior to our inspection were unsuccessful. The registered manager told us this was because of recent changes to contact information, such as email addresses, although they were uncertain as to why we could not get through on the telephone. This raised concerns about how people using the service would be able to reach the office if needed.

However, they demonstrated an IT system they used between staff and the office. They told us this was their main form of communication with staff out in the field and staff could post pictures of activities and events, so she was able to see how people were spending their time. A staff member confirmed this telling us, “We have a phone in the house that has all the numbers and a who to go to sheet in the house.”

Staff felt supported by management. They told us, “They’re all friendly and always present, they do spot checks once a month” and, “With my line manager I have weekly support calls.”

Staff felt comfortable speaking up, telling us they felt able to contribute to the running of the service.

Staff meetings were held in each of the individual supported living settings. These gave staff a chance to talk opening about all different aspects of the service and specifically about the people they were caring for. This helped ensure people’s needs were being met or addressed. A staff member said, “We have staff meetings about things we need to do better in and lessons learnt from things that have gone wrong.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce.

Several staff were recruited through the sponsorship scheme and staff we spoke with felt they were treated equally. A staff member told us, “I can only speak for myself, no one is treated differently in my opinion.”

The registered manager demonstrated a fair approach towards their staff. They told us, “Two staff had not been paid the correct money. It was resolved; however I have commissioned an external investigation into this. When mistakes are made, you need to be accountable.” They added, “We do a lot of (staff) surveys. I make an effort to go on a shift to check on staff. We have a well-being service and a welfare service.”

The registered manager had clear systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality care.

There were a range of audits taking place within the service to help ensure the service remained safe and suitable for people. The registered manager said, “The idea is ensuring we’re keeping things working. We audit medication to make sure things are ordered on time. Care notes are reviewed to see if there is any change in the client.”

House, health and safety, infection control and risk assessment audits were completed and where shortfalls were identified changes were made. For example, it was found one person often refused their medicines. Their behavioural support plan was reviewed and updated and staff were provided with refresher training on how to more effective prompt the person to take their medicine.

The registered manager understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership with people as well as external professionals and the local community. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The registered manager had worked with people to establish a service user group. They told us, “This is led by the service users and the service user engagement worker. People are involved in staff interviews and there is a local church charity where people can work. Some of the service users serve or are involved in the befriending service.”

The registered manager also worked with the local authority commissioning teams. They told us, “Communication is not as good as it could be, but we are building our communication and relationship with the local authority. We had a productive meeting this week and are meeting again in 2 weeks.”

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.

Following an audit of daily notes where it was identified staff were writing notes that were vague and notes that did not always align with the care provided, the matter was discussed during a governance and compliance meeting. The outcome was a proposed structure change to the daily notes template to directly reflect the sections of the individual care plans. This had helped to improve the quality and consistency of daily notes and resulted in managers sharing that it was easier for them to track any change in needs straightaway and as a result be more responsive.