Moorpine

Updated 24 March 2026

Date of Assessment: 23 to 30 March 2026. Moorpine is a care home providing long term support for up to 3 autistic people. The registered manager oversees Inverthorne, The Court and Moorpine, which are 3 domestic sized care homes next door to each other. At the time of inspection, 2 people were living at Moorpine.

We completed this inspection as part of our routine programme, and because of the length of time since the last full inspection was completed. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

People experienced good quality, person‑centred care that supported their rights, independence and wellbeing. Evidence from our site visits, care records, and feedback from people, relatives, staff and professionals showed the service was working in line with the principles of right support, right care, right culture.

Care was delivered in a way that was personalised, consistent and relationship‑based, rather than task‑focused. Staff supported people to access the community, attend health appointments and take part in meaningful activities that reflected their preferences and interests.

Care was rights‑based and inclusive, supporting right care. Staff understood people’s needs well and used a range of communication approaches, including individualised communication systems and accessible information, to ensure people could express their views and make choices. Staff had formed strong partnership working with health and social care professionals, including learning disability teams, GPs and therapy services. People were supported to make choices and take positive risks in ways that were proportionate and respectful of their rights. Staff used a range of personalised communication approaches, including accessible information and tailored communication tools, to help people express their views and understand what was happening in their lives.

Right care was evident through a strong human rights based approach. People were treated with dignity and respect, and their equality, diversity and individual identities were understood and valued. Relatives and professionals told us they felt listened to and confident that staff would respond promptly if concerns arose. Systems were in place to manage medicines, infection prevention and risks safely.

The culture within the service was open, caring and reflective. Staff spoke positively about their roles. They described strong teamwork, approachable leadership and a learning culture where incidents, safeguarding concerns and near misses were reviewed to improve practice. Staff wellbeing was prioritised, and there was a clear link between supporting staff and achieving positive outcomes for people. This stable and motivated workforce contributed to people feeling safe, understood and well supported. People were treated with dignity and respect, and staff demonstrated empathy and warmth in their interactions. Equality, diversity and inclusion were embedded in practice, with people’s cultural, religious and personal identities understood and respected.

Updated 24 March 2026

People had lived at the service for many years and appeared very content. Relatives consistently described the service as a place where their family members felt at home and spoke positively about the stability of care and the strong relationships people had built with staff.

People were not able to share their views verbally, so we used structured observation alongside feedback from relatives to understand their experience of care. Throughout the inspection, we saw people appeared relaxed, settled and comfortable in their home. Staff interacted with people in a calm, warm and unrushed way, using approaches that reflected a strong understanding of each person’s communication style, preferences and emotional needs. These observations showed people experienced care that was kind, respectful and responsive.

Where people found decision‑making difficult, staff used observation, visual prompts and familiar routines to help people express preferences and remain involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Staff used a range of personalised communication tools, including visual aids, social stories and a voice output communication aid (VOCA), developed with support from speech and language therapy professionals. Information was adapted over time in response to people’s reactions and preferences, helping to reduce anxiety and promote understanding. This ensured people had a voice, even when they could not communicate verbally.

Relatives consistently spoke positively about people’s experiences at the service. They told us their family members were happy, settled and well cared for, and described the home as feeling like a family environment. Relatives said staff knew people extremely well, treated them with dignity and respect, and were attentive to their individual needs. Relatives told us they trusted staff completely and felt confident that any concerns would be listened to and acted on. One relative said, “We’ve always been impressed by how much it feels like a family home.It’s in a nice area and the decor is kept up to date and to a high standard.”

People were supported to take part in activities and access the community in ways that reflected their interests and routines. Staff promoted meaningful engagement and helped people maintain important relationships with family members. Relatives told us people had become more settled over time and benefited from consistent routines and regular outings, which supported emotional wellbeing and quality of life.

Relatives spoke positively about the quality of care, and outlined how people were constantly treated with dignity. We observed people’s personal preferences were consistently respected, including when staff supported them with personal care. People enjoyed their meals and were supported to make choices about what they ate. Staff understood people’s dietary needs and preferences. Our observations showed staff interacted warmly and respectfully with people, responding promptly to their needs and offering reassurance when required.