Riverlee Residential and Nursing 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.

Although the manager was new in post, they were supported by a mentor and senior managers. People were receiving a service that was well led.

This service scored 75 (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 and manager had a shared vision, strategy and culture. The manager told us the service had a diverse team of staff and residents. Their aim was to provide people with good quality care, meet their diverse needs and make sure staff were trained to meet people’s needs. Another manager told us they celebrated people using the service and staffs’ diversity, there was an open-door policy for staff and any concerns they raised were taken seriously. They provided training for staff so they could progress and feel appreciated, “Happy staff, happy residents, happy home.”

Staff told us they felt happy and supported working at the service. A staff member said, “Team work here is good, I love my job, we are all here to look after the residents. We make sure people are safe and comfortable, that they can express their views, and their needs are being met.” Another staff member said, “I feel we are in a good place now, I feel supported. The manager’s door is always open.” A third staff member commented, “We look after the residents like they’re part of our own family. My manager is always open to a chat and easy to approach. I’ve spent time in a few care homes, but this is the only one where I feel like management truly cares about us and the people we support.”

There were capable and inclusive leaders. The home manager had been in post for 6 weeks at the time of our assessment. They were in the process of applying to register with the CQC to become the registered manager for the service. They were mentored by an experienced manager and the provider’s regional manager. A peripatetic nurse also provided them with advice and support when required. The manager told us, “The support I am receiving from senior managers is very good.” They attended online catch-up meetings every Friday afternoon with managers from other care homes to share good practice and discuss any ongoing issues. They also attended face to face monthly managers meetings.

The manager was experienced as they had previously managed other care homes. The manager was knowledgeable about their responsibilities regarding the Health and Social Care Act 2014. They were aware of the types of significant events which they were required to notify CQC about and records showed the service had submitted notifications to CQC where needed.

A staff member told us, “The service is well managed, the manager is always helpful.” A relative commented, “The home is very well run, everything happens when it should and there is a lovely calm atmosphere.” Another relative said, “I think the service is very well run and all runs like clockwork.”

Regular staff meetings took place to support and guide staff with best practice. A staff member told us, “The team meetings are good. The new manager was at the last one, he was very good, he listened, and we got to express our views.”

There were systems to enable staff and others to speak up when something was wrong. Staff told us they felt confident speaking up. A member of staff said, “I know about the provider’s whistleblowing procedure, and I will use it if I need to report any poor care practice.” Another staff member said, “The manager wants to hear our opinions on how things can get better. I appreciate that my concerns are taken seriously, especially when I’ve raised issues about colleagues’ behaviour.”

The service had recently implemented a staff ‘Speak Up’ representative to empower staff and ensure staff have an effective way to feedback to management on any issues or concerns they have. We spoke with the staff ‘Speak Up’ representative who told us they started the role in February, and they held staff meeting surgeries on a monthly basis. They informed that they also attend provider staff meetings where they were able to meet and discuss with all the provider’s staff from different services which was good and supportive. They commented, “I am fully aware of the responsibilities of the role and am knowledgeable about the providers safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures. It’s good that staff have this opportunity to raise any issues.”

The provider supported staff to feel included and treated them with equity, taking account of their individual needs. The provider promoted staff career development through the ‘Rising Stars Programme.’ There was a ‘Buddy Mentor Scheme’ which the manager told us builds a culture of learning and peer support. The provider offered staff a discounted gym membership. The provider also offered active support to staff including a LGBTQ+ network, a Race Equality Network and Disability and Parent Networks.

Staff had access to a free confidential counselling helpline. This provided support for staff with health and their wellbeing inside and outside of the workplace. A staff member told us, “I feel the managers look after staff well. They called me when I was unwell to make sure I was okay.” Another staff member said, “When we celebrated Black History month, we dressed in our countries attire and cooked a cultural meal and shared this with other staff and people using the service.”

At our last inspection of the service, we found the systems in place were not robust enough to assess and monitor the service. This was a breach of regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found improvements had been made. The service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

The provider had systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. We saw a report from quality improvement visit carried out by a senior manager where they and the manager carried out a mock care plan audit and reviewed skin tear actions to make sure wound assessments were accurate and triangulated effectively. They also, along with a team leader, reviewed a person’s eating and drinking care plan and discussed the actions to take where the person had consecutive weight loss. We also saw reports from nursing quality improvement visits where they looked at clinical issues with nurses at the service.

The manager showed us a report from an unannounced nighttime spot check they had carried out at the service on 11 May 2025. The manager told us these checks were carried out to make sure staff were supporting people in line with their care needs.

We saw records from the local authority commissioning team’s quality assurance visits to the service.This included actions for improvement. The manager told us the service had taken action to make some improvements and there were time scaled plans in place to address others.

Audits and checks were in place to oversee good service delivery and ensure people’s safety. Audits covered areas such as, medicines, health and safety, falls analysis, infection control, care plans, people’s mealtimes experience, complaints, accidents and incidents and safeguarding concerns. Checks were also carried out on the environments, wheelchairs, baths, call bells and hoisting equipment.

The manager told us they worked in partnership with other organisations. These included the local authority’s dementia care and multi-disciplinary team which included physiotherapists and speech and language therapists. The palliative care team and tissue viability nurses regularly attended clinical meetings to offer advice and share good practice. The manager told us the local authorities commissioning team had been very helpful and they appreciated their support.

The manager told us they attended provider forums run by the local authority where they learned about and shared good practice. They told us the forums had facilitated sessions, for example, on Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR). The session emphasised the need to make sure DNACPR documentation was clear and available for ambulance and hospital staff.

There were systems in place for learning. These included regular training sessions for staff, and meetings and staff supervisions. The manager discussed learning from accidents, incidents and complaints with staff. There was a service improvement plan which was regularly reviewed and updated. There was evidence of learning and improvements.