Relate Care Solutions 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 newly registered 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 71 (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.

There was a shared view of what safe and good quality care looked like within the management and staff team.

There were effective communication systems in place. Team meetings happened regularly and relevant issues were discussed.

Relatives told us they did not have any suggested improvements to the service, and they would recommend the service to others.

The provider had 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 did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered manager and management team were involved in the delivery of the care. This was valued by relatives. A relative told us they knew the registered manager and that “[Registered manager]often comes out to do part of the care” and to oversee the care being provided.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff told us they felt well supported by the managers and they were approachable.

There was a whistleblowing policy in place at the service and staff were confident to use it.

The management team told us they had an open-door policy.

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 service operated with a small team and the management team worked closely with staff.

The registered manager gave us examples of how they supported staff and encouraged them to share concerns or make suggestions. There were policies and procedures in place to promote equality and diversity of the workforce.

Staff had completed equality and diversity training to develop their awareness of protected characteristics.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider’s systems and processes were not effective. Quality assurance was weak and inconsistent, and checks did not reliably identify issues. Problems with medication management and supervision records found during this inspection had not been picked up before.

The management team did support staff to improve some areas, such as daily notes, where we found no concerns.

Managers often provided care themselves, which helped them gather feedback from people and relatives and observe staff practice. However, they did not record this oversight, and there was little evidence showing how they used it to improve the service.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Evidence we looked at showed the service worked in partnership with the wider professional team such as GP, district nurses and commissioners of people's care.

Although we found audits were not always effective, the provider showed a commitment to continuous learning and improvement across the organisation.

The management team demonstrated an open attitude to the inspection findings and feedback. They acted or told us the actions they would take in response of our feedback.