Restore7 Ltd

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 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 was 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 vision, strategy however this was not always shared with staff.

The registered manager spoke of a positive culture they had created for the service. It was unclear if this was shared with staff or how they were involved with this. One staff member said, “I don’t know what the strategy is.” Staff felt empowered and were confident that their concerns would be addressed.

The provider had inclusive leaders who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. However, further actions were needed to ensure they had full oversight of the service. During the assessment, the provider listened to feedback and has evidenced improvement in audits and implemented an overall service action plan. Staff spoke highly of the registered manager and provided positive feedback for their capability to do the role. The registered manager was compassionate to people and staff.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they felt confident to report any concerns with the registered manager. Staff were able to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of their responsibilities relating to speaking up and reporting concerns. The provider conducted regular supervision, staff meetings and staff surveys to gather feedback on the quality of the service. The whistleblowing procedure was communicated and shared with staff multiple times during their employment, ensuring they had access to the procedure when required.

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 told us they were happy working for the service and told us they were valued, treated with respect, and they did not experience any discrimination or harassment. The registered manager gave us examples of how they supported staff who had different needs and priorities on their time. Staff were well motivated and proud of their work and the team they worked with.

The provider did not always have systems of good governance in place. Although audits were in place, the information lacked details and there was no overall action plan for the service. During the assessment, the provider has listened to feedback and evidenced improvement in audits and implemented an overall service action plan.

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. The management team demonstrated the service had strong links with local health and social care teams. Care records evidenced collaborative working with other professionals. The registered manager had an open positive attitude to receiving support and understood how and where they could access support from.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local system. Processes did not always maximise creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. Audits did not clearly identify trends, patterns and commonalities. There was no overall action plan or improvement plan in place. However, during the assessment, the provider has listened to feedback and has evidenced improvement in audits and implemented an overall service action plan.