Crimson Hill Support

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The management and staff team 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. This shared direction ensured each person was at the centre of their support when decisions about their lives were being made.

Relatives were very happy with the care and support their family member received. They often spoke about this in exceptional terms. Comments from relatives included: “[The care is] really good, excellent actually. This company is tailored to our needs and [name’s] needs. They have got it sorted”, “I really like how person-centred support is. I really feel like [name’s] at the centre of what’s happening rather than being an institution they have to fit in with” and “Best service we came across in a long time. They’re [staff are] all very caring. They go the extra mile. When you see them [staff] with clients, they are like family and look like a family unit.”

All staff spoken with told us they were extremely proud of the quality of care and support they provided and to work for Crimson Hill Support. Everything they did was to benefit people they supported. People were supported to live fulfilled, ordinary lives as part of their community. One staff member said, “I am proud of the work we do. I feel overall the care provided is of the highest standard.” Another staff member told us, “I am proud to work here and confident that people receive safe, compassionate, and person-centred care.”

The provider’s staff survey in February 2025 asked questions about the culture of the organisation. Staff said there was a positive, inclusive culture. One staff member commented, “I really like supporting people to live their version of their best life and I feel that the approach to this at Crimson Hill is very enabling. All of the staff care deeply about the people we work with, and each other.”

External health professionals had commended the care and support provided to people. One professional said, “In my opinion, Crimson Hill provide an excellent service for people with a learning disability.”

The provider produced a regular newsletter, ‘The Beacon’. This kept staff up to date on people, staff changes, policies, training, staff support, and shared good news stories. It was also used to thank staff for their work and an opportunity to look forward at things to come.

The management team were all inclusive leaders who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. They had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

A relative told us, “At the moment [the service is well managed]. I do know the manager. Yes, she does contact me.” Another relative said, “Yes, no problems with how the service is managed. [Name] is so happy going there, I wouldn’t want to change anything. Managers, there are 2 or 3 there I get in touch with.”

Relatives and staff were complimentary about how the management team ran the service and the improvements they had overseen. Staff told us all the management team were honest, open and led by example. They also told us the registered manager, service managers and the quality assurance manager visited people regularly in their own homes. Staff told us they could share ideas or raise concerns with the management team. Comments from staff included, “Management are approachable, supportive, and always focused on improving outcomes for the people we support”, “With regards to leadership, I will say they are excellent. Management show their care and dedication to staff and service users at all times” and “Management are very approachable. Staff feel free to share and air their opinions. The company is committed to maintaining high standards and high-quality care.”

The registered manager told us they, and their management team, had worked hard to improve the service wherever possible, build and retain a permanent staff team and foster an open, honest and supportive culture. They said, “Overall, I think the service is going well. We have really focused on supporting our staff better. I do have a really good team who support me. All of the people in the current management team have been with Crimson Hill for some time. All of them have worked their way up through the organisation, including me, and have reached management positions.”

Staff had access to an ‘on-call manager’, available 24 hours a day. This provided extra support for staff, particularly if there was an emergency or if they needed advice or guidance.

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 people, relatives and staff were asked for their views of the service provided.

People and their relatives were actively encouraged to share their views and provide feedback about the service. Each person had a personal monthly review where they could share their views about their care and support. People received regular visits and calls from members of the management team. One service manager said, “I visit my service users and teams each week in order to keep firm bonds with everyone. This allows me to work holistically.”

People and their family members were also surveyed regularly. The provider surveyed people who used their service in July 2025. This survey asked people if staff understood their needs and kept them safe. They were asked about activities, their independence, were they listened to and if they wanted anything changed. All of the responses were positive. One person said, “Yes, they [staff] understand my wishes and needs. One relative told us, “Yes, we fill out [a survey]; it does [get responded to]. On the whole though, we would already have given feedback without the form.”

Staff felt valued and empowered to contribute ideas and feedback. One staff member said, “The service is managed with an open-door approach. Staff are encouraged to share views and suggestions; feedback is acted upon and used to promote continuous improvement.”

The provider’s staff survey in June 2023 asked about communication throughout the team, if there were issues and if staff had ideas in how to improve things. Staff were surveyed again on this topic in May 2024, and improvements were reported, including in staff training and in the culture of the organisation. There were many positive comments made by staff. One staff member said, “The company has its support workers at heart. If you have issues, you know you have a listening ear.”

People and those close to them could complain or raise any issue they wished to; all were listened to and responded to in line with the provider’s policy.

The management team valued diversity in their workforce and ensured there was an inclusive and fair culture.

The provider had a diverse and multicultural staff team. It was noted the use of the staff sponsorship programme had enabled the provider to recruit a more ethnically diverse staff team over the past 12 months. Due to their increasing multicultural work force, the provider was adding inclusion training as part of staff induction training.

Through discussions and feedback from people, relatives, staff, and members of the management team, we found care and support was delivered in a non-discriminatory way and the rights of people with a protected characteristic were respected. Protected characteristics are a set of nine characteristics that are protected by law to prevent discrimination. For example, discrimination based on age, disability, race, religion or belief and sexuality.

The provider had policies and resources available for staff to help protect them from discrimination.

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.

At our last inspection we found the provider had failed to ensure the governance systems in use were fully effective in identifying shortfalls within the service and addressing them. At this assessment, we found the necessary improvements had been made.

There were a series of quality assurance checks in place to review the performance of the service. These included visits, surveys, and regular reviews. Members of the management team visited people and their families to check they were happy with the service and to check in with staff.

Auditing visits were carried out to people’s own homes by the provider’s quality assurance manager. These were generally unannounced visits. These covered observations of staff support, reviewed people’s care and their outcomes, staffing levels, medicine administration, finances, the safety of the environment, and reviewed any accidents or incidents which had occurred. People’s relatives were also contacted for their views either by phone or email. A report was written after each visit, with an action plan included if improvements were identified.

The quality assurance manager told us, “Most of my visits would be unannounced so they don't know that I'm going to be coming. During the visits I spend time with the person being supported to see if they are happy with the care and support that they are receiving from staff. I will also do some observation or work on how staff interact with people and review some records while I'm there. In general, I'm finding that the services are running well. We have some excellent staff who genuinely do care about the people they are supporting.”

They also carried out a monthly audit at the provider’s office base. They reviewed accidents, incidents, complaints, compliments, the office environment, people’s care records, and ensured all documents were stored safely and securely in line with legislation.

All of the quality assurance checks fed into the service’s main action plan. The current plan covered the period from May 2024 to September 2025. The plan included improving staff training and supervision, holding more team meetings, carrying out more staff observations of practice, improving incident recording/learning from incidents and improving staff team diversity. It was noted many of these areas had been improved or were improving in line with the action plan.

The provider clearly understood and carried out their duty to collaborate and worked in partnership with other professionals, to ensure services worked seamlessly for people. They always shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The service had strong working relationships with other health and social care professionals and other agencies and support networks to ensure people received consistent, high-quality care. The management team and staff understood the importance and benefits of working in close partnership with others.

A professional’s survey was carried out by the provider in July 2025. This covered their views on person-centred care, people’s safety, partnership working and any concerns or areas for improvement. The survey results were very positive. Comments included, “[The provider] “Definitely have a person-centred approach to all aspects of [name’s] care…allows [name] to flourish and fulfil [name’s] potential” and “I feel I have a good working relationship with [name’s] care team and parents that allows us to all work together to support [name]. Communication is always clear and timely."

The management team focused on continuous learning and improvement across the organisation and local systems. They wanted good outcomes and a good quality of life for people. They had developed and improved the service and the quality of care and support people received. Discussions with the management team and feedback from staff demonstrated they recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement to ensure people received care and support that was person centred, safe and effective.

The management team used information from feedback, audits, complaints, incidents, and safeguarding alerts to improve the service. Managers worked with staff to understand what happened if things went wrong and involved them in finding solutions to prevent recurrence. One staff member said, “The service is managed with openness, and staff input is welcomed. There is a culture of continuous improvement.”

The registered manager was motivated and responsive to our findings and acted immediately on key areas of improvement. For example, they implemented risk assessments for people who may require physical intervention as part of their care immediately after this was discussed as part of this assessment.