APDA Homecare c/o Daycare and Development Centre

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

The rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. Governance systems were in place to help monitor aspects of the service so that the quality of care provided were continuously assessed and monitored. The manager promoted a culture which emphasised on people’s individual needs. Management had oversight of the service and promoted an open culture. Staff spoke positively about the manager and told us they listened, were approachable and caring. Management sought feedback from people and relatives and made improvements where necessary.

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.

Staff told us they understood the values of the organisation and had sufficient information about these values. The manager explained that in order to provide a quality service, they always ensured there was sufficient time to provide the right care for people. Staff took account of people’s different needs and pace of doing things and ensured there was sufficient time to accommodate this. Management told us they were passionate about assessing people appropriately and allocating appropriate timings so that so that the care met people’s individual needs.

The culture at the service reflected the visions and values of the organisation and best practice. Staff provided personalised care which met people's individual needs.

The manager was approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, family members and staff had to say. Staff spoke positively about the manager and said they felt well supported. A member of staff told us, “I can talk to the manager anytime.” The manager and staff we spoke with were committed to providing high quality care which supported people to live full and fulfilling lives.

Regular meetings between management and staff provided them with an opportunity to discuss the service and people's support needs. The service operated in an open and transparent way. There was an open-door policy where the manager was available for people, family members and staff when they were needed. There were effective systems in place to support this.

Staff told us they knew how to speak up. They felt the manager and the organisation supported them and listened to them. They felt concerns would be acted on.

The provider had systems to support staff to speak up. Staff told us they were able to discuss issues at one to one meetings and the team meeting. They told us they wouldn’t hesitate to report concerns. The manager was aware of their responsibilities and the importance of supporting staff to speak up. Systems were in place for staff to raise anonymous concerns.

Staff were supported with flexible working conditions, felt discrimination was challenged and had opportunities to celebrate their diversity. The manager explained that there was an emphasis on employing people with disabilities. There was a diverse workforce.

The provider had systems to help ensure staff were treated well. They had policies and procedures for workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. These were implemented through recruitment practices, training, and support for staff. The provider's strategic plan included their aim for equality, diversity and inclusion to be central to culture and practice within the organisation.

A management structure was in place. Staff had clear roles and responsibilities and were well informed of their roles and reporting arrangements. Staff spoke positively about the management of the service. The manager had an understanding of people’s individual needs and maintained oversight of the quality of the service to help ensure the service provided high quality care and support.

There were appropriate systems in place to help promote good governance. Audits and checks were carried out to monitor the running and efficiency of the service. The aim of these were to identify deficiencies and help promote and drive improvement. Audits and checks were carried out by the manager and included checks on MARs, daily log notes, punctuality and care plans.

People and relatives told us the care agency was supportive. Feedback was positive about the care provided. Family members we spoke with were confident the service would make referrals to other agencies if needed, for example a health care professional.

The service was open to feedback and actioned input from other professionals. This meant people could be confident that the care agency was committed to improving the quality of care.

Effective systems were in place to foster good working relationships with community health care teams and the local authorities. These relationships supported people to receive joined up care.

The manager and staff had a vision for the service and a desire for people to achieve the best outcomes possible. They were committed to the continuous improvement of the service to ensure people lived full and fulfilling lives. There was a culture of continuous learning and development embedded within the service. The manager also sought feedback from people, family members, staff and other professionals about the service through surveys and conversations.

Systems were in place to seek people’s, relatives’, and professionals' views on the service. There were a variety of audits in place to check on the quality of the service. Areas audited included health and safety, care records and medicines management. Processes enabled the service to use information from audits, feedback and care plan reviews to make positive changes and improvements to the quality of care people received.