Ranmore 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 – 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained the same. 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 71 (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.

Relatives told us there was a positive culture at the service. One relative told us, “There’s this innate honesty here. One of the things that attracted me to this place.” Another relative commented, “We hope [another person] will be able to settle in and start benefitting as much as our [relative has during their] time at Ranmore.”

Staff understood the vision for the service; they told us there was a positive culture, and they felt involved in the running of the service. One member of staff told us, “It’s a very good culture.”

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

Relatives told us the service was managed by capable, transparent and compassionate leaders. Relatives commented that the provider had a positive impact on their loved ones’ lives because they supported people to follow their hobbies, learn new skills and live in a safe environment.

Staff told us the service was managed by leaders who had the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively. One member of staff told us, “It's managed very well.”

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

Relatives and staff told us they felt able to speak up if they had a concern. They told us they felt confident their voice would be heard. One relative told us, “Yes, totally listened to.” They continued to tell us how the provider had repeatedly encouraged them to come to visit the service at a time that suited the relative and without prior announcement, “They don’t try and hide anything. Everything is very natural. There’s no sort of hiding things.” A member of staff commented, “I can go to [provider]. I think [provider is] very approachable. [Provider] always has some time for you.”

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 had completed equality and diversity training. They told us there was an inclusive culture at the service and that they felt valued. One member of staff told us, “When I first came, I did the equality training. We are valued by [provider]. I am so happy here.”

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and generally 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 provider undertook audits of various areas such as medicines management and environmental audits. Where they identified shortfalls, we saw the provider had worked to address these. Whilst there were areas of improvement we identified in relation to audits, the provider addressed these immediately by improving the auditing systems and providing evidence. The impact on people as a result of the shortfalls was minimal. As part of the assessment, we signposted the provider to support in these areas and they transparently acknowledged this and have told us they would seek out further support.

At the time of the assessment, there was no registered manager in post. The current manager’s initial application to register had been rejected due to insufficient information, and we were told by them that a revised application would be submitted.

Staff told us there was a clear governance structure in place and they knew who to approach if they were unsure on how best to support people or any other aspects of their role. One member of staff told us, “We can go to [provider]. We can go to the senior. [Provider] is very approachable.”

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.

Partners told us the service worked well with them and took feedback on board. Staff effectively shared information with partners. The provider understood the importance of working collaboratively and we saw from care records that external partners had been involved in people’s care. The provider ensured people were able to continue visiting the same healthcare professionals and access the community in the same way they were able to prior to moving into the service.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They 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 provider kept their knowledge updated by engaging with external events and undertaking new training when this was available. They told us they were always looking to listen and learn. We found this to be the case during the assessments as all areas we identified were acknowledged and addressed immediately by providing relevant evidence.

Partners told us the provider worked well with them to learn and improve the service when they provided feedback. A partner told us in relation to staff learning, “Only on a couple of occasions we had to stress to staff that they could have escalated the issue with a patient to us earlier, and they were very receptive to that conversation and understood the concern.”