Achieve Together Limited

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. 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 promoted a positive and open culture. Leaders supported reflection, learning and continuous improvement. The management team demonstrated commitment to developing the service to meet people’s needs and improve outcomes through ongoing review and engagement with staff.

Systems were in place to support staff engagement and communication. Staff used supervision sessions and regular team meetings to raise concerns and share their views. This supported openness and enabled staff to contribute to service development and the ongoing improvement of care delivery.

Staff described a positive working environment. They told us there was a good culture within the home, where people and staff had positive relationships and interactions were respectful. One staff member told us, “It is warm and friendly,” and another told us, “We have a strong, dedicated team that work really hard.”

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.

Leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. Managers understood legal frameworks and regulatory requirements and had identified areas for improvement, which were being progressed through an active service improvement plan. This demonstrated ongoing oversight and a commitment to continuous improvement.

People spoke positively about leaders and felt comfortable approaching them. People knew who the registered manager was and described positive relationships. One person told us, “The managers are nice. They chat to me when I get angry and help me to calm down.” Another person commented, “The managers are lovely.” This indicated leaders were visible and accessible to people using the service.

Staff also described leaders as supportive and approachable. All staff spoken with were positive about the management team and provider. Staff told us managers valued, supported and respected them, and led by example. One staff member told us, “I would describe the management as open and responsive,” and another told us, “Dedicated and hardworking. They try their best every day.”

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

Staff told us they could raise concerns without fear of reprisal and told us managers responded appropriately. Staff felt able to share ideas, make complaints and escalate issues, and told us these were handled professionally and in a timely way. One staff member told us, “I have a voice and management always listen.” This indicated staff felt confident to raise concerns.

Systems were in place to support staff to speak up. The provider had up-to-date whistleblowing policies which were accessible to staff. Staff confirmed they understood how to use these policies if needed, supporting awareness of reporting routes.

Feedback from people, relatives and staff was consistent with an open and inclusive culture. This supported effective communication and contributed to maintaining safe, person-centred care.

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 had policies in place to support equality, diversity and inclusion and to protect staff from discrimination and harassment. These policies set clear expectations across the service and supported a respectful working environment, helping to promote consistent practice.

Staff needs were considered and reasonable adjustments were made where required, including for staff with health-related conditions. This supported staff to remain in work and carry out their roles safely and effectively, promoting inclusion and retention.

Staff feedback reflected a positive culture. One member of staff told us, “Flexible working is one of the things I love about working at Cornerleigh.” Another told us, “Managers are very accommodating and also down to earth,” and described “inclusiveness and equity among the staff.” This reflected staff felt valued and supported within the workplace.

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.

Governance and quality assurance systems were in place but were not always effective in identifying and addressing risks. Audits and monitoring processes had not identified a number of issues found during the inspection, including concerns relating to environmental safety, infection prevention and control, medicines management and Mental Capacity Act (MCA) recording. This showed that oversight systems were not consistently robust or effective in providing assurance of safe practice.

Records across the service were not always complete, clear or consistent. We found gaps in medicines documentation, MCA and best interest decision-making, and clinical monitoring records. This meant the provider could not always demonstrate that care was delivered in line with best practice guidance or legal requirements, and reduced assurance that governance systems were effectively monitoring quality and safety.

However, the management team had identified some areas for improvement prior to the inspection and demonstrated a willingness to act on feedback. During the inspection, they responded promptly and took immediate action to reduce risks, including reviewing systems and implementing changes to improve oversight and strengthen governance processes.

While people were not exposed to harm, these gaps in governance increased the risk that issues may not be identified or addressed in a timely way. The provider confirmed plans to strengthen governance systems to ensure consistent oversight, accurate record keeping and sustained improvement.

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.

Staff told us they worked well with a range of healthcare professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. The registered manager confirmed there were positive working relationships with external professionals, including the GP, local authority and commissioning teams. This supported coordinated care planning and responsive support.

The provider had systems in place to support regular review of people’s needs with external professionals, ensuring care remained appropriate and responsive to changing needs. This helped maintain continuity and alignment with wider health and social care input.

Healthcare professionals provided positive feedback about the service. One healthcare professional told us they were satisfied with how staff responded to queries and were impressed with the support provided to a person working to regain skills and increase independence. Another healthcare partner told us, “I found the staff to be caring and receptive to any ideas we explored.” This indicated effective collaboration and shared working.

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.

The provider had a service development plan in place, which included outcomes from the previous inspection, feedback from people, identified areas for improvement, and progress against annual goals. This demonstrated ongoing monitoring of performance and a structured approach to driving improvement.

During this inspection, we identified some shortfalls that did not have an impact on people. The service had made improvements since the previous inspection, including strengthened safeguarding processes and staffing arrangements, which were no longer a concern. This demonstrated progress in addressing previously identified issues.

Although governance and quality assurance systems did not always identify all of the issues found during inspection, the management team had already identified some areas for improvement prior to our visit. They responded promptly and effectively to our findings and took immediate action where required, demonstrating responsiveness to feedback.