Bkind 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

This key question has been rated good. We reviewed 4 quality statements for this key question. We identified 4 breaches of the legal regulations. The systems in place failed to identify the concerns we found during this assessment. There was a lack of governance and oversight of the service. People did not always have care plans or risk assessments to guide safe practice. The monitoring and auditing processes in place were not effective and had not identified the concerns that were found during this assessment. Some staff did not feel confident in the management team whilst others felt supported.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Leaders were unable to demonstrate how they shared their strategy and ethos, we were informed that this was discussed in supervisions, however we did not see evidence of supervisions, so we were unable to cross reference. Leaders told us staff were up to date with mandatory training, however upon checking this was found not to be the case. We received mixed feedback from staff with some stating they felt well led by management and others stating they were not.

The service did not have clear processes to ensure the service achieved its vision of standards of care. Audits were not always carried out. Leaders did not always seek the views of people and their families. There was no evidence of supervisions and team meetings did not evidence that leaders were ensuring their ethos and direction were shared and followed.

We received mixed views from staff about their support from the management team. Comments included, "Yes, I do feel supported very well” and, “I do feel supported” and, “The manager is not approachable.” Leaders stated that they supported staff members to undertake their role, however, were unable to evidence how this was undertaken.

No evidence of staff supervision or appraisal matrix was shared to evidence that people received supervision and support to undertake their role. There were clear leadership and management structures in place, however staff were not aware of their roles and responsibilities. Team meeting did not happen routinely and when they did occur limited information was shared and discussed.

We received mixed feedback from staff with some stating that they are welcomed when attending the office and others stating that although they could attend, any issues would not be acted on and they would be "wasting their time."

Leaders told us that they had an open door policy and staff could come into the office at anytime.

Staff felt that the environment at Bkind Limited and the management team were not always sensitive to staff’s individual needs. We received mixed feedback from staff with some stating that they said there were measures in place which made them feel valued and appreciated, however were unable to state what these were and others stating that the management did not value them at all and at times they felt extremely unappreciated.

Policies and procedures were in place, however there was little evidence to show that these were being followed and that staff were being treated with dignity and respect.

Leaders did not reassure us that they had good oversight of staff and care provided. Although leaders informed us that they visited peoples homes to undertake spot checks and support staff practice, this was not evidenced and not confirmed by people who received services and staff members.

The provider failed to ensure there were adequate systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of services provided, including risks to the health, safety and welfare of people and others. The provider failed to maintain securely an accurate, complete, and contemporaneous record in respect of each service user. There was poor communication and a lack of transparency during the assessment. There were inadequate systems to audit the quality and safety of the service in place. We did see some audits of daily records and medication; however, these did not identify the issues we found. For example, there was a lack of person-centred care, care plans that did not reflect people’s needs and contradictory information within care plans. Therefore, the audits that were undertaken were not effective in driving improvements. The provider could not demonstrate that staff were recruited safely, with adequate training and regular staff monitoring. This is a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

We received mixed feedback from people regarding involvement in reviewing and improving service delivery. Comments included, “I met with the manager initially, however I have not seen or heard from her since” another said I have not been asked for feedback however I communicate with the office regularly.”

Staff, people and relatives were not given the opportunity to share their experiences and views. This impacted on lessons learnt to improve communication between staff and relatives to ensure greater transparency.

There was no evidence showing that the management team were committed to learning and improving their practices. They showed a lack of desire to work and develop the service to improve outcomes and experiences for people. Good governance was not undertaken to allow future learning and action planning .

Processes were not evidenced as being in place to ensure continuous improvement. We saw no evidence of action plans in place, which would be expected following all audit processes where these identified that improvements were required.