Healthvision UK Ltd - North Kensington

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 8 May 2024 (assessment visit 18 January 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   GGood Good

   The service followed robust recruitment procedures and enough staff were employed. Care staff and coordinators completed appropriate training and their competency was regularly checked. Care supervisors and office staff had not always completed appropriate or relevant training. Staff received support and supervision and annual appraisals. The correct numbers of staff were allocated to support people. There were safe medicines processes and regular audits of medicines were completed.

2. Effective

   GGood Good

   People had their needs assessed and reviewed regularly. Care plans were detailed and kept up to date. Staff knew people’s needs well and completed additional and person specific training. Staff understood people’s communication needs and worked in different ways to make sure they communicated effectively with the people they supported. Staff worked well with each other, as well as in partnership with other relevant professionals.

3. Caring

   GGood Good

   Staff told us they cared about the people they supported and provided personalised care based on people’s individual needs. The provider and management cared about staff’s wellbeing and continually endeavoured to provide a positive work culture. A staff liaison officer was being introduced to act as a conduit between care staff and management. Staff sickness and turnover was low.

4. Responsive

   GGood Good

   Care staff listened to people and kept them informed of any changes. Some people found it difficult to communicate directly with people in the office and didn’t feel that any complaints or issues were listened to at that level. The provider was making improvements to ensure people using the service could more easily and confidently share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

5. Well-led

   GGood Good

   The service had a clear organisational structure and staff had designated areas of responsibility and accountability. The provider used feedback from people as opportunities to learn and make improvements. The provider was responsive to comments or suggestions for making improvements and taking the service further forward. There were quality monitoring systems to help identify areas for improvement within the service, although some of these needed reviewing to improve their effectiveness. The service delivered support in the way people wished, including through matching of gender, age, religion and other characteristics. Staff were recruited to reflect the diverse nature of the service. Some staff rotas had been revised to ensure they respected and supported people’s individual cultures. The provider had made improvements to ensure staff felt included, able to speak up and be listened to.