Ransdale House

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

Well-led

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

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.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

Staff and people felt there was a positive culture at the service. Communication channels between people, staff and management were open and effective. The management team were proud of how the staff team promoted the service’s values. There was a good staff morale in the home. A staff member said, “This is a really good staff team. We all pull together. Morale is at its best.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. The management team had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Managers led by example, they knew people in the home well and directly supported people. For example, the acting manager supported people to eat and drink and helped with their care needs.

At the time of this assessment the registered manager was not at work. In their absence another staff member had stepped up to acting manager until their return. The acting manager made sure the assessment process was smooth running.

The management team embodied the values of the organisation and created a compassionate and caring culture which valued staff. Staff praised the management team and told us they found them to be approachable, responsive, and supportive. A staff member told us, “[Acting manager] has done a fabulous job whilst [Registered manager] has been off work. They know people who live here very well and we [staff] have had so much support.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Policies and procedures were in place to enable staff to speak up.All the staff we spoke to were aware of the process to raise issues and how to contact the provider if they needed to.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff surveys had been completed in 2025 Staff. However, we were unable to see the outcomes of these as only a few staff had taken part, and the outcome of this data would not protect the anonymity of staff. Staff did not raise any concerns to us during the assessment of the service.

Staff meetings took place where everyone was encouraged to share their views. Staff said they were listened to in meetings and commented there was a friendly atmosphere at work.

Staff had attended equality and diversity training.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The management team maintained good oversight of the quality of care, records and the premises. The providers governance systems were effective and clear. The providers’ quality team maintained oversight of the quality of the service and completed monitoring visits, which helped support consistent quality.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The provider worked in partnership with other agencies involved in people’s care which helped ensure they received a consistent and effective service. Care records included information and guidance from local authority commissioners, learning disability services and health staff. Staff and people told us how the home was part of the community. People regularly accessed day centres where they took part in activities and developed their skills.

The staff and management team were committed to continuous learning and development. There had been innovations in relation to the transition to positive risk taking such as people accessing the community independently and voluntary work. There was evidence of innovative practice in response to people's individual needs to improve outcomes for people.

Continuous staff training contributed to safe and effective care. Staff worked well together and supported each other to provide good quality care. There was an open culture which promoted inclusivity, reflection and learning. The management team had worked hard to ensure improvements were made in areas highlighted at the last inspection.