Gentle Healthcare Services

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

addressed all the outstanding breaches we identified at their last inspection. This meant the service was now consistently managed and well-led. This was because the provider had implemented the action plan, we required them to complete after their last inspection and improved the effectiveness of how they managed and operated their quality monitoring systems. In addition, we found the provider continued to promote an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people receiving a service, their relatives, and staff working for them. The provider also worked in close partnership with external health and social care professionals and agencies to plan and deliver people's packages of care and support. Our rating for this key question has therefore changed from requires improvement to good.

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.

Managers and staff told us they aimed to give people they supported the best quality person-centred care they could and worked well-together as a team. The manager had a clear vision for the service and told us they routinely used individual and group supervision/team meetings to remind staff about the provider’s underlying core values and principles.

The service aimed to give people consistently good care and staff worked together to try and achieve this. Individual and group supervision/team meetings were used by the provider to remind staff about their organisations underlying core values and principles.

Staff told us the service was well-led by the office-based managers. They said they received all the support they needed from these managers. A member of staff remarked, “This is a good care agency to work for because of the positive environment.” Another member of staff added, “The manager is very cooperative and a good listener.”

The managers had the relevant skills, knowledge, and experience to effectively lead the service, which they did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The manager valued and listened to the views of staff. Staff told us they were encouraged to contribute their ideas about what the service did well and what they could do better during regular individual and group meetings with their manager.

The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people using the service, their relatives, and staff who worked for them. The manager used a range of methods to gather people’s views about the quality of service provided by this home care agency including, regular in-person and telephone contact with people using the service and staff, care plan reviews, and staff meetings.

Staff told us they were treated well by a supportive manager and were not discriminated against. They also said they worked well together as part of a varied and ethnically diverse workforce which reflected the local community and people they provided a home care service to.

The manager valued and respected the equality and diversity of her staff team and treated them equally and fairly.

It was clear from feedback we received the manager now had a better understanding of their roles and responsibilities in relation to assessing, monitoring and managing the quality and safety of the service they provided people. A member of staff told us, “The managers often check our work during surprise visits they carry out on us while we’re on our call visits. We also have regular team meetings and staff surveys where we can give feedback to the managers about how to improve what we do.” Another member of staff added, “Every month I attend staff meetings at the office with the other staff and the managers. The managers also regularly check up on us during our call visits at a client’s home to see how we’re doing.”

As required at the providers last inspection they have developed an improvement plan and taken appropriate action to address all these outstanding issues we identified at that time. This included improving how the provider managed risk, staff recruitment and support, and operated their governance systems. Thorough audits were now routinely conducted by the managers to check specific records and tasks were completed including, staff training and support, observations of staffs working practises, coordinating staff call visits, and staffs record keeping. The outcome of all these audits and checks were analysed at regular intervals to identify performance shortfalls, learn lessons, and develop action plans to improve the home care service people received. The manager understood their responsibilities in relation to their regulatory requirements around notifiable incidents. The service's previous CQC inspection report and ratings were easy to access and clearly displayed on the provider's website. Displaying CQC ratings is a legal requirement, to inform people, those seeking information about the service and visitors of our judgments.

People told us staff supported them to stay in contact with external health and social care professionals and agencies as and when they needed them.

The office-based managers told us they regularly consulted external health and social care professionals and agencies, welcomed their views and advice, and shared best care practice ideas with their staff team.

No feedback was received from any external health and social care professionals.

The provider worked closely with various external health and social care professionals and agencies.

It was clear from the feedback we received from managers and staff they recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement. This helped them ensure they maintained person-centred and safe care for people they supported.

Incidents involving people receiving a home care service were routinely reviewed, analysed, and responded to with emerging themes identified. Appropriate action was always taken in a timely manner to administer the risk of similar incidents reoccurring.