Rhesus 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

The governance systems had not been fully embedded or were not always effective. The registered manager had oversight of the service and was aware of their legal responsibilities. Staff understood their role and responsibilities and felt well supported by the management team.

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 registered manager demonstrated a caring attitude. They built a positive culture which was demonstrated by the staff we spoke to during this assessment. Staff told us they were happy in their role and felt well supported. The management team and staff were enthusiastic about the service growing and developing and were looking forward to being able to support more people.

The management team were contactable for both staff and people using the service. There were systems in place for regular care reviews and regular contact with staff including supervision sessions and spot checks.

The registered manager was committed to growing and developing the service. Currently supporting only a small number of people, they told us they were committed to ensuring the service grew gradually and remained focused on providing good person-centred care. Staff spoke highly of the management team. They felt well supported and confident in their job roles.

The service was led by a registered manager and operations manager with previous knowledge and experience of this type of service. They led a small team of staff. The management team told us as the service grew and developed, they were committed to promoting a positive and compassionate culture. Our assessment identified some areas for development, including improved oversight of risk. The management team responded positively and told us they would be taking steps to make the required improvements.

Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and were confident any concerns would be acted on. The registered manager told us supervisions were held to encourage staff to raise concerns and share ideas in a forum where they felt confident.

Policies in place supported staff to raise concerns both internally and externally. Questionnaires and regular reviews supported people using the service to raise any areas for improvement or concerns.

Staff told us they felt valued and supported by the management team. A staff member told us, “I feel well supported and I am very happy in my role; the managers are very easy to speak to.”

Management and staff had completed equality, diversity, and inclusion training. Staff had access to the services’ policies and systems. There was a small, stable staff team in place, which promoted continuity of care for people.

The registered manager was aware of their regulatory requirements and responsibility under the duty of candour. Duty of candour is a professional responsibility to be honest with people when things go wrong. The management team displayed a positive attitude to the assessment process and was responsive to our requests for information and areas where improvements were needed. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager.

Governance systems were in place but had not been fully tested due to the small number of people supported. Also, the systems in place had not always identified, in a timely way, where care records had not been updated or did not have all the required detail in relation to potential risks to people. Policies were in place to ensure staff knew how to perform their duties in line with guidance, legislation, and the provider’s own ways of working. Emergency contingency plans were in place to ensure staff had guidance in the event of an emergency.

People and relatives told us they felt involved in the initial assessment and ongoing review of their care.

Staff told us they would work with other professionals when needed. There had been only limited opportunities so far for them to do so, due to the small number of people currently using the service.

We received no feedback from partners.

There had been limited partnership working so far. The management team told us any specialist guidance would be implemented and followed ensuring people received the right care and support.

The management team discussed the development of the service and the improvements they had made over the last year. For example, they planned to implement an electronic call monitoring system. Staff we spoke with told us there was a good learning culture within the service and they felt well supported in their role.

Governance and quality assurance processes were in place but not fully tested because of the low numbers of people supported. There had been no incidents or accidents for them to analyse thus far. The management team told us they had the system in place to ensure, going forward, that the analysis of incidents or accidents would take place, and any lessons learnt would be used to improve the quality and safety of care. The management team responded positively to our feedback throughout the assessment and told us steps would be taken to make the required improvements.