Redhouse

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 was rated 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 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.

Staff spoke positively about the culture of the home. There were processes in place to ensure there was a positive culture in the home. This included ensuring the wellbeing of staff and ensuring staff had received training that gave them the skills and knowledge to promote a positive culture.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and how the home was run. One relative said, “Its all good, if I was worried or concerned, they would talk to me and sort everything out.”

There were systems in place to ensure staff and the registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities.

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

There was a whistleblowing policy in place. Staff we spoke with were aware of these procedures and the action they needed to take if they had concerns.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce.

There were procedures in place to consider staffs’ individual needs, this included considering staff’s diverse needs and treating all staff fairly and equitably. Staff raised no concerns with how they were treated.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance.

There were audits in place which monitored the safety and quality of care, including management of medicines and the care people received. There was a system in place to monitor and review accidents and incidents that had occurred. All audits were effective in identifying areas of improvement and making changes where needed.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people.

There were systems in place to ensure the provider worked in partnership with other agencies. The registered manager gave us examples where they had made referrals to other professionals for advice or support.

As part of this assessment, we asked the Local Authority for feedback. They told us care delivery was strong, with positive staff practice and a good resident experience. However, governance, documentation, training, and safety processes require strengthening. We found the provider had made improvements since the local authority visit.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.

The systems in place were used to drive improvements throughout the home. When incidents or safeguarding had occurred, the registered manager ensured lessons were learnt from this.