AOK 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

We identified 1 breach of the legal regulations in relation to governance. The provider did not have an effective system to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided. There was a lack of oversight and monitoring. The quality assurance process included some audits, but they had failed to identify the shortfalls we found during our assessment. There had not been enough improvement at the service since our last inspection. Staff spoke positively about management of the service. They worked in partnership with others to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service. During this assessment, management responded to any requests for information positively.

This service scored 57 (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 felt there was a positive culture within the agency, and they understood the values of the organisation. They said they had a positive experience working at the agency and felt they were a valued part of the team.

There was limited evidence the culture of the agency was focused on learning and improvement. Although some audits and checks were carried out, these had not resulted in the identification of areas for improvement in the service.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager who they found approachable, helpful and responsive. They had confidence in the ability and willingness of management to act on any issues or concerns brought to their attention. However, the management team did not demonstrate clear insight into issues affecting the quality of the service.

Although the provider had a recruitment process in place, this lacked clear information about the provider’s recruitment checks.

Whilst the management team completed some audits and checks on the service, these had not resulted in the identification of any issues, concerns or priorities for the quality of the service.

There was open communication between management and staff. Regular meetings and effective communication between management and staff provided them with an opportunity to discuss people’s individual support needs and the running of the service.

Staff felt the management team were approachable and felt their voices were heard. They confirmed they would speak to the management team about any concerns they had about people’s care, and had confidence these would be acted on.

We were unable to assess the effectiveness of the provider’s processes for investigating concerns and ensuring lessons were shared and acted on, due to a lack of records in relation to such concerns.

Management welcomed feedback from people, relatives, staff and other professionals. Procedures were in place for investigating and responding to concerns and complaints.

Staff did not raise any concerns regarding their treatment by management or the promotion of equality and equity within the service. Staff felt involved in the service and that their voices were heard by management. The registered manager explained how they would seek to match staff to people’s requirements, such as gender preferences and people’s first language.

Staff said their individual needs and requests were met and supported. Staff spoke positively about working at the agency. Staff were supported with flexible working conditions and had opportunities to celebrate their individual diversity.

The provider had failed to ensure governance processes were effective. There was no evidence the service had implemented an effective quality framework that covered all areas of the service. There was a lack of audits and checks taking place. The majority of audits we looked at were tick box checks and lacked sufficient detail and there was no clear record of lessons learnt. The provider had not ensured safe recruitment practices were being followed and their checks had failed to identify this shortfall. Accurate, complete, and up to date staff records were not always kept.

People and their relatives did not raise any concerns in relation to how staff and management worked, or shared information with, external agencies, teams and professionals to ensure their needs were met.

Management understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership with other agencies.

People’s care records provided limited insight into how staff collaborated and worked with relevant external agencies, teams and professionals to promote joined-up care.

The provider had failed to effectively monitor the performance of the service and continually improve care. The service did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement. The provider had not ensured learning and improvement in all areas of improvement identified at the last inspection and appropriate improvements had not always been made.

Audits and checks in place had failed to identify and address some of the issues we found during this assessment and there was a lack of evidence around the service learning lessons.