Rathside Rest Home

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.The service had a clear set of values that staff understood and applied in their daily work. Staff frequently described a culture focused on dignity, respect and treating people “the way you would want your mum to be treated,” which showed the values were embedded in practice. Several staff said the home felt “like family,” and relatives consistently praised the friendly and well‑organised environment, with one relative stating, “It is a clean and comfortable place; everybody seems to know what they are doing.” Leaders communicated openly with staff and relatives, and people told us they felt able to raise concerns and be listened to.

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 management team were visible in the service and provided consistent support, with multiple staff describing them as approachable, helpful and committed to high standards. Relatives also described the management team as responsive and easy to talk to, saying they acted quickly when concerns were raised. Leaders demonstrated an inclusive approach by responding to concerns raised by staff, such as facilitating flexible working when required and offering additional support during difficult periods. Staff reported confidence in leaders’ knowledge and skills and felt they led by example.

The provider fostered a positive culture where staff felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.Staff told us they felt comfortable speaking up and were confident they would be listened to, saying, “You feel comfortable to report anything if you are concerned; management listen.” Outcomes of concerns raised were fed back through supervisions or team meetings, helping staff understand the learning that resulted. Relatives also confirmed they could raise issues with managers and were confident these would be resolved, with several describing the service as “open and approachable.” The culture supported staff and people to speak up without fear.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.Staff said they felt treated fairly and valued by leaders, reporting, “I am treated very well. I feel I can go to them with any problem I have.” Staff also described supportive responses to requests such as flexible working, and leaders ensured human rights principles were understood, including confidentiality, respect and equitable treatment. People and relatives consistently reported being treated with respect, and there were no concerns raised about discriminatory practice.

Governance systems were in place, but these did not yet operate effectively enough to consistently demonstrate oversight and completion of required actions.Audits such as infection control, medication, fire safety and care planning were completed. However, some audits did not demonstrate follow‑through on required actions, and leaders acknowledged that “the loop” had not always been completed. Although staff and relatives consistently described the service as well run, we saw areas where oversight was not fully effective, such as incomplete safety checks, environmental issues requiring action, and the need to evidence outcomes of maintenance schedules more clearly. The management team were responsive to our feedback and began making improvements to processes during the assessment.

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 service worked well with healthcare partners, including regular contact with GPs, district nurses and specialist teams. A community nurse described the service as “very responsive… very clean… eager to aid healing and provide comfort.” Staff said referrals were responded to promptly, and relatives praised the service for keeping them informed when external professionals were involved. People were supported to maintain community connections, such as themed events and family involvement, and one relative reported, “They involve [Person] in activities most days; they love it.”

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.Leaders encouraged staff to contribute ideas for improvement, and staff said management listened and acted when appropriate, with suggestions also discussed during appraisals. The service used audits, reviews and incident analysis to identify areas for learning, although some actions needed more consistent follow‑through. Staff described a learning culture where team discussions were used to reflect on incidents and prevention strategies. The provider also trialled new approaches, such as using AI tools for identifying themes and trends in incident data.