• Care Home
  • Care home

Cockington House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

38 Cockington Road, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG8 4BZ (0115) 928 8013

Provided and run by:
Broadoak Group of Care Homes

Assessment report published 22 December 2025

Ratings

  • Overall

    Requires improvement

  • Safe

    Requires improvement

  • Effective

    Good

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Date of assessment: 29 September to 30 September 2025.This assessment was a follow up from the previous assessment where the service was found to be in breach of regulation relating to safe care and treatment and good governance.

Cockington House is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 6 people living with a learning disability and autistic people. Accommodation is provided over 2 floors. A communal lounge with a dining room, and kitchen are based on the ground floor. At the time of our assessment there were 5 people using the service who were in receipt of a regulated activity.

We assessed the service against the ‘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.

Right Support:

People were not all encouraged to lead their lives in their chosen way and take control of decisions about their care. Independence was not effectively encouraged or supported. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, but staff did support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies in the service supported this practice.

People were not consistently kept safe. The environment was not kept hygienically clean, and people were not consistently supported appropriately with continence and personal hygiene. Staff did not always manage medicines well, but people had regular health checks and medication reviews.

The registered manager and staff did not support people with positive risk taking, to take part in activities in their local community, and try new things. The registered manager and staff team did not all have the right skills, qualifications, and experience. Managers had failed to make sure their own continuous development, and that of the staff team, was effective and current to maintain high-quality care.

Right Care:

People received dignified care that respected their privacy, but care and support was not always person-centred. Individualised care and support plans were in place, but they did not all contain current and accurate information that enabled staff to provide appropriate and safe care for each person. People’s preferred communication styles were known and respected. Staff knew what people were communicating by patterns of actions, gestures, or sounds.

Right Culture:

The values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders had not ensured people using the service led confident, inclusive, and empowered lives. Staff and managers did not have shared values which were based on supporting people to have fun and live a good life. Staff were not supported effectively to understand individual’s specific needs.

People's experience of this service

We used the CQC’s Quality of Life Tool as part of the assessment of Cockington House. The tool focuses on the experience of the person receiving care and what it feels like for them to be using the service. Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. Where people were unable to share feedback on their experience of the care they received, we spoke with relatives and used observations to assess whether they received good care.

This approach showed some people were not engaged in meaningful activities and staff did not consistently interact with people and provide them with the correct level of support, for example, support with personal hygiene. There was no record of choice in how people's day unfolded, and not all people had structure to their day meaning people were left uncertain. No data was collected about how people were progressing/struggling with hobbies/interests/daily living. There was evidence that care plans had been reviewed but the issues with incorrect information had not been identified and updated meaning people may not have been receiving the care and support that was right for them.

People and relatives generally felt happy with the care people received and were able to raise concerns. We spoke with one person who told us about what activities they do, “Tidy my room up. Watch tv. Normally at Christmas they book it in for me (visit to family). I miss sleep overs with them and getting holidays.” One relative said, “[Name] has a good life, loads of lovely photos, I’m so happy now [relative] is settled there, and [name] is really being looked after well.”