Versita 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.

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.

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 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 providers statement of purpose set out their aims and objectives for the service and their core values which underpinned their work. People were at the centre of their support when decisions about their care were made. Staff had received training in equality, diversity and people’s human rights.

Staff understood the providers vision for the service and their role in achieving it with people. A staff member told us, “We ensure people are safe and heard. We put them first and recognise each person is an individual.”

There was a positive culture where both the provider and staff wanted to learn and improve the service for people. Since January 2025 there had been a focus on identifying and addressing gaps in staff’s training and improving the provider’s risk management and oversight. Staff were positive about their work. The registered manager monitored the culture of the service and completed relevant spot checks.

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.

The registered manager who was also the nominated individual had acted following the inspection in January 2025 to make the required improvements for people. They recognised the regulated activity was provided to a diverse range of people with different needs and experiences and they had acted to make the required improvements. They had made improvements to staff training for specific mental health diagnoses and strengthened their risk oversight and governance.

The registered manager was supported in their role by their management team and team leaders who worked in each of the supported living properties. The staff team felt the service was well-led by management and said they were supported in their role.

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

There were clear reporting structures, staff understood who to speak up to and how. Staff could raise any issues directly with management face to face, at supervisions or through the staff survey. Staff were encouraged to speak out and felt able to do so. When concerns had been raised these were investigated and lessons were learnt.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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 provider had reviewed and improved their systems for identifying, capturing and managing risks. The registered manager ensured incidents were reviewed on a monthly basis for each person and any trends were then identified and an action plan developed.

The provider was committed to only using restrictive interventions, when necessary, to prevent physical harm to either the person or staff. They had processes in place to ensure it was only carried out by trained staff, and its use was monitored and evaluated to understand when and why it had been used and to identify any required actions.

The provider completed a monthly risk register for each person where the risks associated with their care needs were rated to provide an up-to-date overview of the current risks and controls in place to mitigate them. The provider held monthly governance and quality assurance meetings where they reviewed safety and quality data for each person. A quarterly analysis of the incidents for each person was then sent to commissioners which enabled external oversight of any identified risks for people.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.