Ravens Care Kettering

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Relatives told us staff promoted their family member’s wellbeing and independence, enabling them to enjoy activities and new experiences. One relative said, “Social support is valuable for both [Person] and me, as they get out doing things they enjoy.”

Support plans were comprehensive and reflected people’s preferences and what mattered to them. They provided staff with clear guidance to support individual’s safely while promoting independence. Communication needs were clearly recorded, helping staff engage effectively and support people to express their views.

Staff told us they were matched with individuals based on preferences, interests, and compatibility. One staff member explained that shadowing experienced colleagues helped them develop a person-centred approach. Staff recognised the importance of personal space, family life, and social opportunities, supporting people to develop daily living skills and maintain independence.

Overall, people received tailored care from staff who knew them well and supported them in a respectful, compassionate, and person-centred way.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. They worked collaboratively with a range of professionals, including GPs and learning disability health and social care teams, as well as staff from day services people attended. Staff communicated effectively with colleagues and external professionals to ensure coordinated care and smooth transitions between services.

Relatives also confirmed that staff recognised changes and sought appropriate support. Information was shared effectively through clear systems to update staff, ensuring continuity of care avoiding the need for repetition. Care records showed staff sought advice and made referrals promptly when people’s needs changed.

Relatives told us their family member received support from a consistent staff team who were reliable and understood their needs, routines and provided care in a consistent and well‑organised way.

Overall, people experienced care that was continuous, well planned and delivered by staff who worked collaboratively across teams and with external partners to support positive outcomes.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. They met the requirements of Accessible Information Standard, ensuring information was available in ways people could understand.

Key documents, such as support plans, hospital passports and activity plans, were provided in accessible formats such as pictures, large print, easy-read versions and in different languages if required.

People’s communication needs were assessed as part of assessment and care planning, including consideration of hearing, vision, and speech. A relative told us, “[Person name] has severe autism and a learning disability. Although they can’t communicate verbally, they can express themselves.”

Staff were trained to communicate in ways people could understand, using gestures, flashcards, and signs where appropriate. One staff member said, “[Person name] is unable to communicate, but I would show them options, or they will points or will take you to what they want.”

Systems were in place to store confidential information securely, and the provider ensured compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Staff were trained in GDPR and understood their responsibilities when handling personal information. Electronic devices were secure and password-protected, helping to ensure that private and sensitive information was only accessed by authorised persons.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

A range of mechanisms were in place to encourage feedback, including complaints and compliments processes, care review meetings, key worker sessions, and surveys. These were available in accessible formats to support understanding and engagement. People and their relatives were actively encouraged to provide feedback through these channels. Relatives told us they were involved in care planning and reviews and felt listened to when discussing risks and how these would be managed safely. Their views were respected, ensuring they had a meaningful say in how their support was delivered.

Staff supported people to be involved in day-to-day decisions, adapting their communication approach to meet individual needs. This included the use of communication aids and simple language to ensure people understood any changes to their care.

The service had a complaints policy in place, including an easy-read version, which was known to people and relatives. One relative said, “I have no concerns about the service. I definitely know how to complain.” Another told us, “Initially we raised concerns, as the timing and staff were not quite right for [Person’s name]. We worked together to find the best times and staff that work for them. There have been clear improvements.”

Systems were established to ensure all concerns were recorded, investigated, and analysed to identify trends and prevent recurrence. Staff confirmed that lessons learned were shared with them. Compliments received were shared with staff, with particular recognition given to individual team members for their positive contributions.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People received care in line with their assessed needs, with staff ensuring support was delivered consistently and as planned. Care was personalised to reflect individuals’ needs, preferences, and abilities.

Relatives told us they had no concerns and felt staff were proactive in supporting their family member to access the service, leading to positive outcomes.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported and worked in partnership with them to promote inclusion and independence. Where appropriate, people were supported by staff of their preferred and compatible gender, reflecting a person-centred approach. The provider’s on-call system ensured that staff had access to support and advice at all times, and staff told us that responses were provided promptly when required.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity, and human rights and were treated equally and fairly, and relevant policies were in place to support inclusive practice. They recognised the barriers people with learning disability and autistic people may experience.

Relatives told us their family member was well supported and that staff consistently demonstrated an inclusive, person-centred approach in their day-to-day practice. Support plans reflected what was important to the person, such as maintaining family relationships and attending day clubs.

Relatives told us and care records showed, staff provided care and support tailored to the individual’s needs and abilities, enabling them to achieve positive outcomes and make progress towards their personal goals. This helped ensure people experienced reliable care and positive outcomes, regardless of their individual circumstances.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

At the time of the inspection, the service was not supporting anyone receiving end‑of‑life care. Where appropriate, people’s end-of-life wishes were discussed and documented, in line with their preferences and those of their relatives.

The registered manager and care manager explained that not everyone felt ready to engage in these conversations, and this was respected and revisited sensitively over time. They confirmed that, should end-of-life care be required, they would work closely with the person, their relatives, and relevant professionals to ensure care was delivered in line with the person’s wishes and all needs were appropriately met.