Raintree Care 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.

Staff were supported by the registered manager to deliver consistently safe, person-centred, and inclusive care and support to people in line with the provider’s vision and values for the service. A staff member told us, “Raintree Care Ltd has a culture which is very inclusive and fair. They are a good company to work for.” Systems and processes had been designed in line with this vision and focused on people and meeting their individual needs. The registered manager routinely used individual and group meetings to remind staff about the provider’s underlying core values and principles.

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 understood the context in which they delivered care and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. They had the knowledge, skills and experience to lead effectively and they did so with integrity, openness and honesty. People praised the leadership approach of the registered manager who they consistently described as approachable, supportive and effective at running this supported living service. A relative told us, “We have a fantastic relationship with [name of registered manager] who is always approachable and friendly.” An external care professional added, “The placement is well-managed, The manager [registered] is approachable, responsive, open to professional dialogue and knowledgeable about my client’s needs.” Staff were equally complimentary about the leadership approach of the registered manager, “[name of registered manager] is very knowledge and always approachable and fair.”

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

The registered manager promoted an open culture where anyone could report issues without fear and where concerns were acted on appropriately. People expressed feeling able to raise any concerns they might have and were confident their views would be taken seriously and acted upon. An external care professional told us, “The provider actively listens and acts on recommendations from other health and social care professionals, and the families of our clients.” The provider had supporting documents including, an accessible complaints and staff whistleblowing procedures, which set out clear expectations for how concerns should be reported and dealt with by them.

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They had an inclusive and fair culture which had improved equality and equity for people who work for them.

The provider supported staff fairly and promoted an inclusive working environment. Policies reflected equality and diversity principles, and the registered manager ensured staff needs were understood and accommodated. Staff reported feeling valued and treated fairly. Staff had opportunities for career progression, were offered flexible work options and had their diverse cultural and religious needs respected. Staff were also supported through relevant training and supervision to inform their knowledge and understanding of equality, inclusivity and fairness in the workplace.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The registered manager and senior staff conducted regular audits and reviews in relation to the quality and safety of the supported living service people received. The registered manager routinely visited each property and undertook daily monitoring checks, audits and reviews of the service, including a tour of the premises. The registered manager understood and demonstrated compliance with regulatory requirements. They also understood their responsibility to provide honest information, suitable support and to apply duty of candour where appropriate.

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 provider shared information and learning with partners and worked closely with to continuously improve. An external care professional told us, “The registered manager and staff are in constant communication with other health and social care professionals who provide regular updates, recommendations, and advice which they always listen to and action.” The registered manager and staff confirmed they worked in close partnership with a range of external health and social care professionals and bodies who they regularly consulted and welcomed their views and advice. These external community health and social care professionals included GP’s and NHS medical staff, learning disability and positive behavioural support teams, local authority social workers, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists and college staff.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.

Systems were in place to review performance, identify learning opportunities and adapt practice. The provider also demonstrated willingness to innovate and develop their service and systems, including investing in a new electronic care records system. However, they did not routinely analyse the outcome of audits and checks they regularly conducted to identify performance shortfalls and learn lessons. When lessons needed to be learnt, the provider had not developed time specific action plans which set out clearly what, how and when they needed to take steps to improve the service they provided people. We discussed this issue with the registered manager who agreed they needed to routinely review and analyse the outcome of all the audits and checks they undertook. They also agreed to develop time specific action plans setting out exactly what steps they needed to take to improve the service they provided people.