Reignscare 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 the legal regulation in relation to good governance.

This service scored 50 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There was not always a positive or person-centred culture at the service. The provider did not carry out robust checks on staff performance or the safety and care of people using the service. Whilst staff, people and external professionals were generally positive about their experiences, failures to ensure governance systems were effective placed people and staff at risk.

Leaders failed to ensure the service complied with legal regulations. The registered manager did not operate effective governance systems, and this led to inaccurate records and failures to ensure safe recruitment, staff training and support, assessment of people’s needs and care planning.

The provider was operating a supported living scheme. This was not part of the provider’s statement of purpose or registration. Providers are required by law to have an up to date and accurate Statement of Purpose that sets out, “The kinds of services provided for the purposes of the carrying on of the regulated activity and the range of [people’s] needs which those services are intended to meet.” The provider’s most recent statement of purpose stated that they would provide personal care to people with a learning disability. However, there was a condition on the provider’s registration stating they are not permitted to do this. We discussed this with the provider, and they agreed to ensure their statement of purpose is up to date and accurate.

Care staff told us the registered manager was supportive and inclusive. A staff member commented, “[Registered manager] is an amazing manager. [They listen] and no matter how small my problem is.”

There were systems to enable staff and others to speak up when they felt something was wrong. Staff told us they knew what to do if they had concerns. They explained they felt confident speaking up. Comments from staff included, “I can contact the [registered] manager anytime to discuss anything” and “The [registered] manager always listens and is always there if we need to speak up.”

There were policies and procedures to support workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff told us their individual needs and diversity needs were respected. The registered manager supported staff with flexible working arrangements. A staff member told us, “They make sure I can work flexibly and I can take time off if I need.”

The provider’s systems for monitoring and improving quality were not always operated effectively. Where audits were in place, these had not identified where improvements were needed, where records contained errors or where information was incomplete.

Records of checks on staff delivering care were inaccurate and did not provide assurances that managers had observed staff giving care.

The provider’s systems for assessing and mitigating risks were not operated effectively. They had not always assessed and planned for risks relating to people’s care, or ensured staff were suitable and well trained.

The provider had not maintained accurate, complete or up to date records relating to staff or people using the service. Records for both staff and people using the service were duplicated, contained incomplete or contradictory information and the names of other people or staff.

Failures to ensure good governance and oversight placed people at risk of receiving inappropriate care and treatments.

The provider did not always ensure they worked well with partners and communities. The provider’s website and social media platforms gave information about services they were not registered to provide and the wrong postal address. We discussed this with the registered manager who explained they needed to source support to help them update these platforms.

An external professional told us they did not have much contact with managers at Reignscare, although they told us they worked with care staff.

The provider’s systems for learning and improvement were not always effective. The systems for staff training and supporting them to learn about best practice needed to be developed. Staff did not always have access to the information they needed.

The local authority carried out an assessment of part of the service in April 2026. They shared their findings with us. During their assessment, they had identified areas where improvements were needed. We found that some of these improvements had not been made when we carried out of assessment in August 2026.