Gary Care Limited

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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 79 (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.

People using the service, their relatives, and staff benefitted from the provider’s focus on person-centred care, delivered consistently and safely. Staff understood and implemented the organisation’s strategy, which promoted people’s wellbeing, stability, and independence. They felt supported in their roles and embraced the provider’s culture of innovation, continuous learning, and improvement. The Provider Information Return (PIR) was detailed and comprehensive. It showed a clear understanding of the service, the people supported and the manner care was delivered. The PIR clearly set out the provider’s vision to deliver high-quality, person-centred care that placed people at the centre of decision-making and promoted dignity, compassion and respectful service. It also showed good insight into risks, areas of development and how learning was used to improve outcomes. This provided a strong foundation for safe, effective and values-led care and supported continuous improvement across the service.

Staff were actively engaged with the service and told us they enjoyed their roles. They were passionate about delivering individualised care and supporting people to maintain independence and participate in community activities. Staff spoke positively about the management and leadership of the service.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context of care delivery and embodied the organisation’s values. Leaders were skilled, knowledgeable, and credible, always acting with integrity, openness, and honesty. People and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and described them as competent, supportive, compassionate, and responsive. Comments included, “[Registered manager is good. I like him”; “[Registered manager], is approachable, compassionate and regularly catches up with us.” A member of staff told us, “We are well looked after. Great place to work.”

Leaders worked closely with health specialists to enhance their own knowledge and share best practice with staff, supporting professional development and succession planning. Staff felt highly supported and valued, commenting, “I feel very valued and supported in my role. The [registered manager] is readily available. The office staff are easy to talk to” and “We are encouraged to share our views about the services and feel a part of the team.”

The management team fostered an inclusive culture, challenged discriminatory behaviour, and promoted partnership working with people, relatives, and staff. Feedback from satisfaction surveys and open communication was actively used to inform service development, ensuring personalised, high-quality care. A healthcare professional told us, “[Registered manager] is professional, flexible, and compassionate, particularly in supporting staff wellbeing due to the intensity of the support provided.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. People and their relatives said they knew how to raise concerns and felt listened to through regular questionnaires and open communication, with no concerns raised.

They told us the registered manager was honest, approachable, and receptive to ideas to improve the quality of care and develop the service.

Staff knew how to whistleblow and had information on raising concerns both within and outside the organisation. They felt valued and confident that the registered manager listened to their views. The provider promoted openness and honesty when things went wrong, and staff felt safe to speak up without fear of reprisals.

This approach minimised the risk of a closed culture, as staff and the provider worked together transparently. Lessons were learnt from incidents, and staff maintained positive working relationships. Handovers and information sharing were open, and team meetings were used as learning opportunities to prevent issues before they arose.

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 an inclusive culture for its diverse staff and the people they supported, acting without discrimination. Staff received training on equality, diversity, and inclusion, including cultural awareness and unconscious bias.

The provider had procedures to support workforce equality and diversity, such as reasonable adjustments, flexible working patterns, and opportunities within supervisions to discuss and reflect on lived experiences and challenge biases that could affect care delivery. As a result, staff were motivated, experienced high morale, enjoyed stability and retention, and described the organisation as fair and transparent since joining the agency.

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 registered manager demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities and legal obligations when providing care. The provider effectively used governance systems to ensure the smooth running of the service and to maintain business continuity in the event of adverse events.

Robust audits were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service, and changes were implemented as appropriate to improve people’s care. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and had access to up-to-date policies and procedures, which enabled them to deliver care in line with best practice and meet regulatory requirements.

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.

People benefitted from the provider’s partnership working with other agencies and health and social care professionals. The provider ensured people had access to a range of specialist professionals, including a neurodiverse and trauma therapist, dietitian, GP, and learning disability psychiatrist. This enabled staff to receive and implement best practice guidance on people’s communication needs, sensory requirements, and positive behaviour support strategies. People and their relatives told us staff delivered person-centred care, which supported improved health and well-being.

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.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and the provider’s focus on delivering high-quality, person-centred care. They told us that information-sharing and communication systems were effective, enabling timely interventions when people required additional support.

Learning from incidents was embedded in practice. A healthcare professional told us an example of early incidents of the person running in public led to improved forward planning, daily discussions about activities, and structured routines. These changes significantly reduced risks and improved outcomes for the person. Additional measures, such as ensuring music devices were charged during outings, were implemented to support emotional regulation.

The provider supported staff to develop innovative approaches to care through regular supervision, detailed handovers, training, refresher courses, and tailored support plans. This resulted in a confident and focused staff team who delivered care with compassion and assurance. As a result, people experienced improved outcomes, including enhanced wellbeing, fewer accidents, and increased participation in community activities of their choice.