MacIntyre Leicester

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 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 rated inspection, we rated this key question Outstanding. At this inspection the rating has remained Outstanding. This meant service leadership was exceptional and distinctive. Leaders and the culture they created drove and improved high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 89 (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 very clear shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and an exceptional understanding of the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The service demonstrated an exceptionally strong and unified culture at all levels across the service, underpinned by MacIntyre’s DNA, a value-based approach to support developed by the provider, which staff described as “the way we do things here” rather than a document or set of rules. The DNA was clearly embedded in everyday practice and shaped how staff thought, behaved and supported people. Staff consistently spoke about the principles with confidence and pride, explaining how they guided their actions and decision‑making. They told us the DNA helped them stay focused on what mattered most to people, with one staff member saying, “It’s how we work, how we talk to people, how we treat each other.”

The DNA’s emphasis on “Living a life that makes sense your way” was evident in the highly personalised, person‑centred support people received. Staff demonstrated the core behavioural values of being honest, respectful, compassionate and kind, and we observed warm, natural interactions that reflected genuine relationships. Staff were ambitious for people, reflecting the DNA’s focus on ambition, and consistently promoted opportunities for people to learn new skills, try new activities and achieve personal goals.

Equality and safety were also central to the shared culture. Staff demonstrated a strong, active commitment to equality, ensuring people had fair access to healthcare, community opportunities and the same rights as anyone else. The DNA’s focus on safety was evident in the way staff supported people to feel safe, in control and confident in their environment.

This deeply embedded culture meant people experienced care that was not only safe and effective but purposeful, joyful and empowering. Staff at every level understood and lived the DNA, creating a shared direction that consistently delivered outcomes for people.

The provider had exceptionally 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. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They always did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Leaders demonstrated the skills, values and commitment needed to run a safe and person‑centred service. They were visible, approachable and well‑respected by staff, who told us they felt supported and able to raise concerns or ideas without hesitation. Staff comments reflected this positive culture, with one person telling us, “The managers are brilliant, very good, always come back to you,” and another saying, “My direct manager is very supportive. We can actually go to any manager, including the registered manager. They are so supportive and want the best for people and us.” These views showed that leaders were trusted, responsive and genuinely invested in both staff wellbeing and the quality of care people received.

Leaders demonstrated a highly inclusive and person‑led approach to building and developing the staff team. People and their families were actively involved in designing and shaping recruitment processes, from creating interview questions to taking part in interviews themselves. Their lived experience, cultural insight and personal aspirations were treated as essential in selecting staff who could genuinely enrich people’s personalities, interests and identities. This meant new team members were chosen not only for their skills, but for their ability to build meaningful relationships and contribute to a service where people felt represented, understood and valued. This approach reflected capable, compassionate and truly inclusive leadership, ensuring the workforce was shaped by the voices of the people who mattered most.

Leaders worked to continually develop and improve service delivery and outcomes, taking meaningful learning and innovation from across the wider organisation and embedding it into the local service. This ensured improvements were not only sustained but informed by best practice and shared expertise. They encouraged reflective practice and learning, and were open about areas for improvement, taking action when needed. This leadership approach fostered a stable, motivated workforce and contributed to a culture where people were treated with dignity, respect and genuine care.

Leaders promoted a culture of kindness, compassion and inclusion, modelling the behaviours they expected from the team. They understood the needs of people with learning disabilities and autistic people and ensured staff had the training, guidance and confidence to deliver high‑quality care.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The provider had effective systems in place to support a culture where staff and relatives felt able to raise concerns without fear of detriment. Staff told us they were confident to speak up about issues affecting the quality or safety of care, and they felt managers listened and took appropriate action. Several staff described the environment as open and transparent, with one commenting that they “felt safe to raise anything, big or small, knowing it would be taken seriously.” Relatives also told us they felt comfortable approaching the management team if they had concerns or suggestions, and they consistently reported that communication was responsive and respectful.

The provider ensured regular staff meetings and house meetings with people and families were held, creating structured opportunities for information sharing, open discussion and raising concerns.

Records showed that concerns raised were reviewed promptly, with learning shared across the team. This contributed to a positive culture where people’s voices were valued and continuous improvement was encouraged.

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.

The provider promoted a positive culture of equity, diversity and inclusion, and staff told us they felt respected and treated fairly. Policies and procedures reflected current legislation and good practice, and staff had access to training that supported their understanding of inclusive working. Recruitment processes were designed to ensure equal opportunities, and leaders took steps to remove barriers for under‑represented groups. Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns about discrimination or inequality and were confident these would be addressed appropriately.

The service celebrated diversity within the workforce and encouraged open conversations about individual needs, beliefs and backgrounds. While the provider was continuing to strengthen its approach to monitoring EDI outcomes, we found that staff felt valued and included, and that the culture supported a sense of belonging across the team.

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 service had effective governance arrangements which ensured people received safe, consistent and well‑managed care. Leaders had clear oversight of the service and used a range of quality monitoring tools to identify strengths, address shortfalls and drive ongoing improvement.

The provider was making several improvements to service delivery and oversight, including the introduction of a new electronic care‑planning system. At the time of the inspection, managers were in the process of transferring information and embedding the system within staff practice. This meant, temporarily, some information was held in different places. Despite this, staff and managers knew people extremely well and ensured key information was accessible, up to date and clearly communicated. Clear instructions were in place for monitoring people’s outcomes, and leaders-maintained oversight to prevent any disruption to people’s care during the transition.

The provider had systems in place to ensure the service remained sustainable, including workforce planning, training investment and regular review of resources. Leaders worked collaboratively with the wider organisation to ensure policies, learning and best practice were consistently applied. Governance processes were used not only to maintain standards but to support continuous development, helping the service remain stable, well‑led and focused on delivering high‑quality care.

Audits were completed regularly and were meaningful, with actions tracked through to completion. Managers understood their responsibilities and maintained good communication with staff, ensuring information flowed well across the service. Audit findings were routinely fed back to the team in a clear and transparent way, enabling staff to understand performance trends, identify areas for improvement and celebrate positive outcomes. Staff told us they felt informed and supported, and managers were organised, approachable and responsive when issues arose.

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

The service worked exceptionally well in partnership with local organisations and community groups to support people to remain connected and involved in their wider community. Staff understood the importance of community inclusion and actively sought opportunities that matched people’s interests and support needs. Positive relationships were established with local services, including leisure providers, community centres and voluntary groups, which helped people access meaningful activities safely and confidently.

For example, one person with complex communication needs regularly enjoyed going out for a pub lunch. Staff took proactive steps to ensure this experience was meaningful and inclusive. They worked closely with the pub’s servers to explain the person’s preferred communication methods and how best to support them. As a result, the person was able to interact confidently and independently with bar staff when ordering their food and drinks. This promoted their autonomy, upheld their dignity, and enabled them to participate in their local community on their own terms

Staff liaised with external professionals when needed and shared relevant information to ensure people received coordinated support. Health professionals reported communication was timely, respectful and centred on shared goals for people’s wellbeing. Feedback from professionals highlighted staff were responsive to clinical advice, escalated concerns appropriately, and contributed meaningfully to multi‑disciplinary discussions.

These collaborative approaches enabled people to receive coordinated, well‑informed care, supported early identification of changing needs, and helped prevent avoidable deterioration. Also supporting people to maintain social connections, develop new interests and feel part of their community.

The provider had a strong focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They always encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The service demonstrated an exceptional commitment to continuous learning, innovation and improvement, driven by a strong organisational culture that prioritised reflective practice, co‑production and evidence‑based development. Leaders and staff were proactive in seeking out new approaches that enhanced people’s experiences and outcomes, and there was clear alignment between local practice and wider organisational learning.

The provider actively sourced funding to support regular projects, research and improvement initiatives, ensuring services had access to high‑quality resources and emerging best practice. For example, the organisation recently completed a significant project to support people with learning disabilities and autistic people to understand and manage feelings related to experiences of death and bereavement. This work resulted in the creation of a best‑practice paper, “Dying to Talk,” which was shared across services and used locally to strengthen staff confidence and improve the quality of conversations and support offered to people.

Innovation was not limited to organisational projects. Leads within the wider system provided organisational support which included health teams, Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) specialists and quality improvement leads played an active role in ensuring new learning, legislation updates and best‑practice guidance were shared promptly and meaningfully at local level. These teams provided responsive, hands‑on support when a local need emerged, ensuring services could adapt quickly and effectively to changes in people’s health, behaviour or circumstances. Staff described this support as “invaluable” and “always focused on what will help people the most.”

Additionally, people who used the service were meaningfully involved in sharing lived experience and contributing to organisational learning. A national newsletter was developed and written by a person supported, sharing provider‑wide news, personal stories and experiences from people across services. This not only amplified the voices of people with lived experience but also strengthened the organisation’s culture of co‑production. More locally, a person was supported to use the office space to develop a monthly magazine for people in the area, featuring information on travel, local news, entertainment and updates about changes within the service. This initiative brought people together, strengthened community connections and ensured information was shared in a way that was accessible, engaging and led by people themselves.

This deeply embedded culture of learning and innovation meant the service did not simply maintain good practice but consistently built upon it. Staff were encouraged to reflect, question and adapt their approaches, and people were empowered to contribute to shaping the service. As a result, people benefited from care that was dynamic, forward‑thinking and informed by the latest evidence, lived experience and organisational expertise. The provider’s commitment to innovation ensured the service remained at the forefront of high‑quality support for people with learning disabilities and autistic people.