Angy Care Limited

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 2 breaches of regulations in regard to good governance and fit and proper persons. Systems and processes were not in place to ensure there was a positive culture within the service. The provider and registered manager did not demonstrate they had the experience, capability and integrity to ensure care and support could be delivered safely and that risks were well managed. The provider and registered manager did not have systems in place to identify the serious concerns we found during the assessment. The oversight was poor and inadequate and there were no systems or processes in place. The provider and registered manager did not have processes in place to ensure that learning happened when things went wrong.

This service scored 36 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We could not collect evidence under this category from the provider and registered manager as they would not engage with us throughout the assessment. The business manager was not able to provide information relating to the oversight of the service.

Systems were not in place to ensure there was a positive culture within the service. The provider and registered manager did not demonstrate a positive, compassionate, listening culture that promoted trust and understanding between them and people using the service which was focused on learning and improvement. The provider and registered manager failed to engage with us throughout and following the assessment. The provider and registered manager had not prioritised safe, high-quality, compassionate care. Systems were not in place to review the care people received. The provider and registered manager did not actively promote equality and diversity with the service, there was no systems in place to ensure people and staff felt valued and respected. The provider and registered manager did not demonstrate values that ensured they were an appropriate role model to other staff.

We could not collect evidence under this category from the provider and registered manager as they would not engage with us throughout the assessment. The business manager was not able to provide information relating to the oversight of the service.

The provider and registered manager did not demonstrate they had the experience, capability and integrity to ensure care and support could be delivered safely and that risks were well managed. The provider and registered manager did not lead by example, they did not demonstrate openness or honesty. The provider and registered manager did not engage with us during the assessment, despite a number of attempts. They also did not ensure that suitable leadership and management was in place while they were unavailable. The business manager who was left in charge was not allowed to access information relating to people’s care and support and they had no knowledge of the oversight of the service.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We could not collect evidence under this category from the provider and registered manager as they would not engage with us throughout the assessment. The business manager was not able to provide information relating to the oversight of the service.

The provider and registered manager did not have systems in place to identify the serious concerns we found during the assessment. Their oversight was inadequate: there were no systems in place to review and monitor the quality of care delivered. The provider and registered manager lacked knowledge around data protection and confidentiality. The provider and registered manager was the only person who had access to any records relating to the service and they refused to allow CQC access ‘due to confidentiality’. The registered manager did not understand their responsibilities as a registered person or understand their role around confidentiality and the risks associated with them being the only person who could access records. Effective systems were not in place regarding accountability arrangements. For example, the business manager had been left in charge but had no knowledge of the systems and processes. Systems were not in place to ensure safeguarding incidents would be acted upon in a timely way and there was not a process in place to record accidents and incidents.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We could not collect evidence under this category from the provider and registered manager as they would not engage with us throughout the assessment. The business manager was not able to provide information relating to the oversight of the service.

The provider and registered manager did not have processes in place to ensure that learning happened when things went wrong. There was significant and widespread concerns that the provider and registered manager had failed to identify. The provider and registered manager could not demonstrate they kept up to date with national policy to inform improvements to the service. There was no evidence the registered manager and provider reviewed best practice. The provider and registered manager failed to evidence they had external relationships that supported improvement and innovation.