Aspire 2B Care

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 61 (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.

Whilst the management team demonstrated a commitment to person-centred care and improving outcomes for people some staff who had recently joined the company reported they did not feel the visions and values had been well communicated and said their transition could have been improved. We were assured the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities which most people take for granted.This priority was embedded in the culture and purpose of the service.

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.

There was a focus on genuine, positive outcomes for people, the development of staff and the quality of the service. The provider was approachable and visible. However, there had been no registered manager in place since April 2025. The provider assured us this would be addressed and plans were in place to make the appropriate application. The management team had clearly defined roles and responsibilities. However, record keeping had not always been kept up to date. The provider was responsive to our feedback and strengthened the day-to-day reporting procedures during our assessment. The provider was active in the service and available to staff and people.

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

The provider had a whistleblowing policy in place, which included clear guidance to support staff to ‘speak up’. Staff understood the processes to follow, should they have any concerns. Leaders ensured people knew and were able to exercise their rights.

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.

The provider employed a diverse staff team. Human resource policies were in place to ensure staff understood their rights as an employee. The provider valued diversity in their workforce and worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. All staff completed training in equality and diversity. The recruitment process was fair and inclusive, with health questionnaires completed to ensure the provider was aware of any reasonable adjustments required to support staff.

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

A schedule of audits and checks were in place. However, we found over recent months they had not been completed consistently. This included spot checks on staff and reviews of care records. There was no evidence of recent provider scrutiny, which meant there was a risk shortfalls and potential poor practice may not have been identified. Whilst we did not find any evidence of harm or poor care, there had been a lapse in oversight. We discussed this with the provider, and they were open and transparent about the reasons for this. We were assured they had taken prompt action to address this and promptly strengthened their approach to governance. The provider completed an action plan after the first day of the assessment and took action to complete a suite of audits and checks.

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 demonstrated they valued and welcomed partnership working. The management team and staff had developed effective relationships with external professionals and had taken appropriate and well considered steps to improve outcomes for people by working closely with partner agencies. The provider was part of the local care provider’s forum and valued the support and shared learning this provided. People and relatives told us they worked in partnership with the provider. Comments included, “I have a very strong relationship with the management and office staff. They are there whenever I need them.”

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people.

The provider acknowledged over recent months there had been a lapse in wider service development. Our assessment found the overall rating at this assessment had changed from good to requires improvement. However, the provider responded very positively to our feedback, and we were assured the shortfalls we found would be addressed. The provider shared a service improvement plan, which included the findings from this assessment.

The model of care was in line with current best practice guidance ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. Leaders worked with people, their representatives and staff to build a culture which focused on enabling people to enjoy a full life.