Motaryli 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 regulation 17 relating to good governance.

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 shared vision, strategy and culture. Staff expressed pride in their work and a shared commitment to delivering high-quality care to the person they supported. The provider described their intentions to expand the service into different avenues. Staff reported a good work ethos and mutual respect. However, there was limited evidence of a shared strategic direction being embedded across the service.While some improvements had been made since the last inspection, some improvement remained outstanding in relation to the overall governance of the service, such as embedding the new systems and policies in place.

The provider had an inclusive leader who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support. Following our last assessment, we highlighted areas of concern which required further improvement. Although most areas had improved during this assessment, the registered manager’s new governance systems were in their infancy and further implementation, and oversight was required by the registered manager to improve on the issues we found during this assessment and continue their learning and knowledge of the new systems they now had in place.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The service had a whistleblowing policy in place for staff to refer to if they required guidance on speaking up. Staff told us they knew how to report any concerns appropriately and the registered manager placed high value on staff well-being and understood how the policy was implemented within their service.

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. Processes were in place which helped to protect the rights of staff under the Equality Act. This helped to create a more equitable and inclusive organisation. Due to the small nature of the service, there was flexibility for staff and evidence of amended work patterns.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. During the last assessment, the service was in breach of regulation good governance. During this assessment, governance had improved, with new systems aiming to enhance processes and oversight at the service. However, these systems were in their infancy, and the registered manager was still being supported to implement and develop the systems in place. These systems needed to become sustained and embedded, and the provider needed to ensure effective oversight at all levels within the service continued. The service was therefore still in breach of regulation 17, as we could not be assured with evidence that the new systems in place were robust.

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 service had established good links in the local community and had worked in partnership with key organisations.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. The registered manager told us about their committed to providing a good quality service, however, the previous quality assurance systems in place had hindered this and prevented the continual improvement of the service. During this assessment, a new care and governance system was in place. However, these systems required embedding to evidence continuous learning and development within the service.