The Raikes Residential Home

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

The service 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.

The service had clear identified values, for example, the service’s statement of purpose advises they focus on key areas of care; these include, "independence, rights, privacy and treating people with dignity and response". This information was shared in client guides given to people using the service.

The service 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.

The service did not currently have a registered manager due to exceptional circumstances; however, leadership remained a significant strength. The service had been proactive and recruited a new registered manager in an appropriate timescale. The service was led by senior staff, supported by the provider.

Leadership in the service was outstanding, demonstrated by a high level of capability and compassion in their approach. Leaders were highly visible, responsive and led by example, modelling the services values, working alongside the staff team. Leaders had a thorough understanding of the service and the people they supported.

There was a high standard of relevant documentation regarding leadership oversight in place, for example, leaders completed regular checks of staff competency and recording of care interventions, analysing for any emerging patterns or trends. Leaders were responsive to any emerging concerns in addressing this sensitively with staff.

Leaders completed thorough, additional checks on people’s care documentation who were particularly at risk, for example those at nutritional risk.

Staff we spoke with provided a high level of positive feedback for leaders in the service. One staff member told us, “They [leaders] are really approachable, we can go speak to them.” Professionals working with the service provided feedback which was consistent with outstanding leadership. One professional told us, “I cannot speak highly enough of [the leaders].” People consistency expressed confidence in the leaders of the service. One person told us, “Leaders know the home and the residents so well, you can ask [them] anything and [they] have the information at [their] fingertips."

The service was exceptional at fostering a positive culture where people knew they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The service implemented a positive and open culture where speaking up was not only promoted but actively encouraged. Staff felt empowered to drive improvement and voice concerns to leadership and knew these would be taken seriously and acted upon. For example, staff told leaders there were staffing issues with supporting people during a particular period of the day. In response, leaders swiftly added additional staff in the service at this time.

Whistleblowing policies were well embedded and understand by staff. There were whistleblowing and freedom to speak up policies in place, which staff knew how to access. There was information widely available throughout the service to support people or staff to speak up, including relevant safeguarding, complaint and whistleblowing information. This provided staff, people and relatives the opportunity to speak up independently. Staff we spoke with told us they felt they could speak up to leaders in the service. One staff member told us, "I feel I can approach leaders with any concerns; they would take concerns seriously 100 percent." People and relatives, we spoke with, all spoke highly of leaders in the service, felt able to raise any concerns with them and were confident in leaders to manage these appropriately.

The service 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 provided consistently positive feedback regarding leaders in the service supporting equality and inclusion. Staff members provided examples where adjustments had been made in their work to support them to continue working.

The service 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.

Leaders in the service had robust systems and processes in place to support good governance. There were regular audits within the service to drive improvements. For example, regular reviews by leaders of repositioning, skin integrity checks to ensure consistent care was provided. Any emerging themes or concerns would be discussed and documented with staff to support their learning and improvements in the service. There was robust documentation in place throughout the service including relevant policies and guidance to support good governance.

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

Working collaboratively with other services was embedded throughout the service. Leaders took a proactive approach in building working rapports with relevant professionals, to ensure people received safe and efficient care. Good working relationships were developed across health and social care which enabled the service to access the relevant support for people, at the right time. Professionals provided consistent positive feedback regarding the service. One professional told us, "Where escalation has been required, referrals have always been comprehensive, accurate, and appropriately completed, which has avoided unnecessary delays in dietetic involvement." Another professional told us, “Actions arising from our care plans are implemented promptly and effectively [in the service], very often enabling residents to be safely discharged from our service following a single review.”

The service 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 service had a thorough analysis in place of any incidents or safeguarding matters which had occurred, and these were discussed in supervision with staff. This was evidenced with relevant research and legislative practices. The service was responsiveness to learning and put swift actions into place where any areas of improvement identified during our assessment.

Professionals told us the service has been involved in promoting shared learning with other services. One professional told us, “[The service] have contributed valuable input into the development of our updated course content.” Staff told us they have regular supervision to discuss any areas of improvement and viewed this as a positive. Staff provided consistent positive feedback to learning and innovation. One staff member told us, “They [leaders] are really approachable, we can go speak to them, I don’t feel I cannot say anything, they would listen and take any concerns on board.” Another staff member told us, “Supporting people in bed can be challenging. Managers have been responsive when we needed more staff.” Staff told us they were given opportunity to provide ideas for learning or improvement in team meetings. People told us they were given opportunity to provide feedback as to how the service could be improved by letting management know when they visit, and felt confident leaders would take on board any areas of feedback or learning.