Precision Home Care Ltd

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 service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the service management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on placing people at the centre of their care and understanding their needs and rights. The service worked collaboratively with people and those important to them, engaging in regular conversations to understand how to improve the care provided.

The leadership of the service embodied the values of their workforce and organisation. However, leaders were not always able to demonstrate a robust understanding of the issues and priorities for the service. They did not always ensure they had time to develop their own skills and knowledge and this had impacted on their ability to lead effectively. At the time of the assessment, there was no clear strategy to effectively address areas where improvements were needed. However, following our feedback, the registered manager sought external support to review their processes and implemented an action plan for the service.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they were able to speak to the registered manager openly about any concerns. Staff had access to whistleblowing information and guidance if required.

The service supported inclusivity and diversity in their workforce. The service had policies in place to support fair and inclusive recruitment and training. Staff told us they were able to speak to the registered manager and request any additional support they required.

The service did not have clear systems of accountability and good governance. Governance processes were not robust. The registered manager’s checks and audits had failed to identify concerns with people’s risk assessment documentation and the lack of personalisation in people’s care plans. Issues with people’s medicines records and staff recruitment and induction documentation had not been identified and addressed. At the time of the assessment, the registered manager was delivering direct care to people on a daily basis. They confirmed this had impacted on their ability to focus on their management responsibilities and oversight. Following our feedback, the registered manager took immediate action to address the concerns raised.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information with other health professionals where relevant to improve people’s quality of care.

The service did not always focus on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation. Whilst the registered manager had implemented a monthly review of the service to identify areas of improvement, this had not been implemented effectively. This meant concerns and learning had not always been identified and actioned.