Ralle Health Limited

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.

At our last assessment this key question was rated good. At this assessment this has remained the same. 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.

People’s daily routines, preferences and what mattered to them were clearly recorded. For example, care plans described people’s preferred routines, social interests and family connections, helping staff to deliver care in a way that was familiar and reassuring. Feedback from relatives consistently described care as personalised, consistent and delivered by staff who knew people well.

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.

The provider ensured people received consistent care that met their needs and was delivered reliably. Rotas showed regular visit times across the day, and people received care from a small, consistent staff team. This helped people build trusting relationships with staff and supported continuity of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Policies were in place to explain how personal information was used and protected, and the provider recognised their responsibilities under data protection legislation. People were informed about how their information was stored and how they could request access to it.

Some policies were brief and lacked detail in certain areas, such as retention periods. However, information provided was sufficient to support people’s understanding of how the service operated.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Feedback from relatives was consistently positive. Relatives told us staff were friendly, reliable and caring, and that they felt confident raising any concerns. People valued seeing familiar staff, which helped them feel safe and supported.

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

People had fair and equal access to the service. Staff told us the provider treated everyone equally and made sure support was adapted to each person’s needs. Staff described the organisation as inclusive. There was an oncall system in place out of hours.

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.

Outcomes were monitored through regular reviews, daily notes and audits. People with complex needs had detailed plans to ensure safety and wellbeing.

Staff demonstrated an inclusive approach, ensuring people with communication barriers, reduced capacity or long‑term conditions received the same level of attention and monitoring as others.

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.

Where people had progressive conditions, plans included clear instructions about monitoring, escalation and risk management. Staff encouraged independence and supported people to make daily choices, helping them plan activities and routines.

Although not all people required end‑of‑life support, the provider considered how needs might change and adapted care accordingly.