Rapid Care

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 – 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 remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The service continued to be in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.

This service scored 61 (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. Staff were positive about the culture of the service and described good team working. A staff member said, “I would say I am proud of the company, when I speak to clients, they are happy with the care they receive. I know the company has a good reputation and feel proud to be part of company that has that reputation. Clients recommend us to other people which I think speaks volumes for the company.” People and relatives confirmed they would recommend the care provided by Rapid Care.

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. Staff felt the service was managed by capable and compassionate leaders. A staff member said, the provider and registered manager carried out their roles well. They said, “[The provider] is very professional, very hard working, [the provider] is always approachable if you have a problem. [The registered manager] is a good manager always on the phone 24 hours a day."

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. There was a whistleblowing policy in place which outlined the process for raising concerns. Staff knew how to raise concerns inside and outside the organisation. Staff told us they felt comfortable with their individual line managers and the registered manager and felt able to tell them any concerns.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture. Staff had a good understanding of equality, diversity and inclusion and what to do if they did not feel this was supported, this was underpinned by training they had completed about equality, diversity and human rights. A staff member said, “You would never treat anyone differently based on skin colour, beliefs, anything like that. If you feel you’re discriminated against let manager know."

The provider continued to not always have clear systems of accountability or good governance. Governance systems to assess, monitor and mitigate risk had not been operated effectively. Robust processes were not in place to effectively review service users’ care records. For example, the issues we found in relation to detailed and up to date guidance in people’s care records had not consistently been identified. Records in relation to people’s care were not always accurate or complete. We found instances where the care recorded for people conflicted which meant the provider could not have effective oversight of the care people received to ensure it was safe and effective.

Robust governance processes were not in place to support the safe management of medicines, and the provider had failed to ensure staff were following the services policy in relation to medicine management.

The registered manager told us they were behind on auditing records of people’s daily care and the actions required on the system. This meant some issues with people’s care had not been identified and managed in a timely manner.

Some people and relatives felt the service was not very well managed in terms of their care call monitoring and scheduling.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. People, relatives and staff were positive about the partnership working in the service with other agencies, and healthcare professionals.

Staff spoke positively about learning from other professionals. A staff member said, “We usually work with [Occupational Therapists (OT)] once in a while they come to assess clients when they come we usually work with them. Aside from our training, they give details and OT teaches you. It is put in the care plan."

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. After our last inspection the provider told us they would take action to address breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. They said they would make people’s risk assessments and care plans more focused to address risk. However, at this inspection risk assessments and care plans still did not consistently contain detailed and sufficient person-centered guidance for staff to follow to ensure service users’ individual risks and needs were met and managed safely. To address the previous breach of good governance the provider told us all managers would be assisting in operating and monitoring audit systems. However, at this inspection, audits had still not been operated effectively. The registered manager’s care file audit and previous medicine audit records did not contain details of what had been audited, any findings from the audit or actions taken. The date these tasks were completed was all that was recorded in the record. This meant the provider could not effectively evaluate and improve the practice at the service.

The provider had not always used the quality assurance processes to continuously learn and improve effectively for example to consider patterns or trends overtime from audits or feedback received which could help the service develop and improve.