Sambhana 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 Inadequate. 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 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager and the nominated individual 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 demonstrated a clearer shared direction than at the last inspection. Staff understood the expectations of the new management team and told us the culture had improved, with more openness, communication and consistent expectations. The registered manager had introduced regular meetings, reflective supervision sessions and unannounced spot checks, which helped embed a more accountable culture.
People told us, “Yes, absolutely. I have seen a massive improvement in the last 6 months” and “Definitely have improved over the last year.”
The management team were visible, approachable and promoted a learning culture, but the service remained in a period of transition. Continued focus was required to ensure that the improvements introduced by the registered manager were sustained and consistently implemented by the whole team.
 

The provider now 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 registered manager and nominated individual were seen as approachable, supportive and committed to improving the service. Staff described leaders as fair, compassionate and willing to listen, and told us communication had improved since the previous inspection.
One person told us, “The management has improved a lot. I now do not worry. I have seen positive change since the new manager came in. The carers have also changed, and they are more caring and have a better understanding of the job.”
Leaders had the skills and knowledge needed to oversee the service; however, many of their improvements were still relatively new and had not yet had time to become fully embedded. The progress made since the last inspection was wholly positive.
Leaders understood the cultural needs of the community, particularly through the support of the supervisor who shared the heritage of many people using the service. This helped shape more inclusive and personalised approaches. However, leaders acknowledged more work was required to develop staff confidence in supporting people from unfamiliar cultural backgrounds.
 

The registered manager fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.
Staff told us they felt more comfortable raising concerns since the new management team had been in post. They said managers were approachable, responded to issues quickly, and encouraged staff to speak openly during supervision or informal discussions. Whistleblowing and safeguarding policies had been updated, and staff demonstrated awareness of how to escalate concerns.
However, some staff told us that historically they did not feel listened to, and although this had improved, a few remained cautious about raising issues. Leaders acknowledged the need to rebuild trust and had begun implementing strategies to strengthen staff confidence, such as anonymous feedback channels and team-building sessions.
Overall, staff now felt safer to speak up, but the culture of openness was still developing and needed further embedding across the entire workforce.

The registered manager 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 from a range of cultural backgrounds were employed, and leaders had begun introducing training to improve cultural awareness and understanding—particularly important given the specific needs of the local community.
The registered manager and nominated individual were working to create a fair and inclusive culture, and staff told us they felt respected. However, there remained gaps in staff confidence, particularly around cultural sensitivity and communication, indicating that equality and inclusion initiatives were still in the initial stages of being fully embedded.

The registered manager 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.
Governance systems had improved since the last inspection but were not yet fully embedded or consistently effective. The registered manager had introduced a range of quality monitoring processes—including audits of care plans, medicines, call monitoring and risk assessments—but these were still developing and had not yet demonstrated sustained reliability.
For example, audits had identified issues such as incomplete MAR charts and gaps in risk assessments, yet these findings had not always resulted in timely, documented follow-up action. Whilst immediate improvements were made when concerns were raised during our inspection, the need for external prompting indicated that governance systems were not yet robust enough to identify and address issues independently.
Roles and responsibilities were clearer than before, and staff understood who to escalate concerns to. However, some staff told us they were still adjusting to new processes and that changes had been frequent, which made consistency difficult to achieve.
Although the service had made significant progress, the governance arrangements required further time and oversight to ensure they became embedded, sustainable and capable of driving continuous improvement without direct intervention from the management team.
 

The registered manager 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.
Staff consulted effectively with GPs, district nurses, hospital discharge teams and community support networks. Feedback from professionals was generally positive, noting improved communication and responsiveness.
Work with the local community, particularly the Indian heritage community, had strengthened since our last inspection. Leaders used community insight to support culturally appropriate care planning and training.

The registered manager 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.
The registered manager had begun establishing a culture of learning and improvement. New audits, enhanced training programmes, and reflective supervision were increasing staff skills and knowledge. Leaders sought and acted on feedback from people, families and staff to refine practices.
There were early signs of innovation, such as the proposed cultural food preparation workshops and the redesign of care plans to be more personalised and user-friendly.
However, improvements were still in their early stages and had not yet demonstrated sustained long-term impact. Some learning processes—such as analysing trends in incidents, complaints and care notes—were not yet fully developed.
The registered manager and nominated individual were clearly moving the service in the right direction but remained at an early phase of development in its improvement cycle.