Inverthorne

Updated 24 December 2025

Date of Assessment: 23 to 30 March 2026. Inverthorne is a care home providing long term support for up to 4 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, 3 people were living at Inverthorne.

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.

People had often lived at the service for many years and appeared very content. Relatives consistently spoke positively about the stability of support and the relationships their family members had built with staff, with one relative describing the service as a “second family”. Care was delivered in a way that was personalised, consistent and based on long‑term relationships rather than task‑focused routines. Staff supported people to access the community, health appointments and meaningful activities that reflected their preferences.

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. Families and professionals told us they felt listened to and confident that staff would act quickly if concerns arose. There was strong partnership working with health and social care professionals, including learning disability teams, GPs and therapy services. Medicines, infection prevention and risk management systems were in place and managed 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. 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 December 2025

People were unable to share their views verbally, so we used structured observation to understand their experience. During the inspection we saw relaxed, warm interactions between staff and people. Staff consistently spoke with people in a warm and unrushed way. They offered reassurance when people appeared disorientated or distressed and had a depth of knowledge about them, which they used to help people reduce their anxieties. These observations showed staff knew how to approach people, used people’s preferred communication styles and offered choices in ways people could understand.

Relatives consistently told us their family members were happy, settled and well cared for, and staff knew people extremely well. One relative said, “I am completely satisfied with the service and the way they have adapted to [person’s] needs. They are kind and thoughtful with them.”Staff supported people in ways that upheld dignity, choice and independence. People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff, and we saw many examples of warm, respectful care. People experienced care that supported their rights, independence and quality of life, in line with the principles of right support, right care, right culture.

Relatives and professionals told us people were comfortable expressing when they were unhappy and trusted staff to respond appropriately. People were supported to be involved in decisions about their care, daily routines and activities, and families felt confident staff would raise and act on any concerns quickly. Professionals described the service as clean, well organised and responsive, with staff playing an active role in multidisciplinary working. A relative said, “I trust the staff with [person] because they have shown that they can be trusted. They take them to dentist and doctor's visits, and they recognise a lot of their needs and wishes simply because they have worked hard to find out about [person] by observing and watching them.”

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. 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.