Impression Health and Support Domiciliary 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 – 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.

This is the first inspection for this service. 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 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. One staff member told us, “This is a nice place to work. All of the staff get on.” A relative told us they felt the culture of the service was “homely” and genuinely believed the staff acted in the best interest of their family member.

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. There was a focus on ensuring people enjoyed the best quality of life possible. The registered manager said, “We just try and encourage people to do as many normal things as possible, like me or you. So, we want our staff to do the same.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff felt they could speak up. One relative did suggest communication could sometimes be better which we escalated to the registered manager at the time of our feedback.

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 demonstrated kindness within the workforce and this was confirmed by our conversations with staff. Staff with diverse needs were given flexible support to enable them to support people to the best of their ability.

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. There was a robust approach to quality assurance and action plans had been assigned to the registered manager for completion and then checked off by the quality manager to ensure this had been completed in a timely manner.

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. We saw evidence of collaboration with social workers and other members of multi-disciplinary teams to ensure good outcomes for people, with particular reference to supporting a person to manage their dietary intake safely.

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. The provider was supportive to staff and encouraged them to progress and develop in their roles by accessing work-based qualifications.