- Care home
SENSE - 58 Featherstone Road
Assessment report published 11 March 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 20 to 28 January 2026. Sense - 58 Featherstone Road is a specialist residential care home that is used by autistic people or people with a learning disability. Sense - 58 Featherstone Road can accommodate and provide personal care to 5 people.
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. The service met the requirements of the ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance and promoted people’s rights, independence and equality
We carried out this inspection after a series of concerns were raised with us regarding safety and management at the location. At the time of our inspection there was no evidence the concerns raised were substantiated.
People experienced positive, person‑centred support. Relatives consistently told us staff knew their family members well, respected their individual needs and preferences and supported them to make day‑to‑day choices. Staff promoted people's dignity, independence and rights, and people had access to activities they enjoyed both at home and in the community. Relatives said communication was open and responsive and staff involved them appropriately in people’s care.
People were protected from avoidable harm, and staff understood how to recognise and respond to safeguarding risks. Risk assessments and communication passports helped staff support people safely, including when they moved between services. Staff were recruited safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. The environment was clean and well maintained, and the provider responded proactively to updates and changes in guidance, for example, fire safety requirements. The service was compliant with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), and appropriate assessments, best‑interest decisions and applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been completed in line with legal requirements.
Staff recognised changes in people’s health and sought timely input from healthcare partners. Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to express their preferences and plan for the future, including important decisions about end of life care. The service met the Accessible Information Standard, and staff ensured people received information in formats matched to their individual communication needs.
During this inspection we found improvements in leadership and governance, although further work was ongoing to embed these changes. Leaders had addressed cultural issues that had previously affected the service and had taken steps to rebuild a positive, values‑led environment. Staff and relatives told us morale and teamwork had improved, and staff felt more supported and confident. Governance systems were in place and were used to monitor quality, respond to feedback and maintain oversight of key risks. The manager was in the process of registering with the Commission, and the management team demonstrated insight into areas which requiring continued strengthening.
People's experience of this service
People and their relatives spoke positively about the support they received and about how staff understood their individual needs. Feedback showed people were encouraged to make day‑to‑day choices, and relatives felt their family members were cared for in a personalised and respectful way.
Relatives told us their family members were supported to make choices about food, clothing and daily routines. One relative told us their family member was supported to choose when to get up, go to bed and what they wanted to wear. They went on to say staff took extra steps to encourage them to make positive decisions to accommodate for adverse weather conditions when choosing clothing. People were able to spend time in their rooms when they wished and were offered foods they enjoyed. Families said this approach had been consistent over many years.
Relatives felt involved in people’s care. They told us there were no restrictions on visiting people in their rooms and said staff and managers responded positively when they shared concerns. One relative described how staff explained an injury promptly, and another said they had taken part in care reviews either in person or by phone. Families also confirmed staff engaged appropriately when discussing sensitive issues, such as end of life wishes.
Relatives said they received information about medical appointments and were updated when people needed additional support, such as home visits due to distress or anxiety. They told us people’s health needs, including epilepsy and dental care, were understood by staff. People received their medicines as required.
People had access to meaningful activities they enjoyed. This included walks, visiting social centres, spending time in sensory spaces and taking part in community outings like going to the park or hairdresser. One person particularly enjoyed engaging in a specific activity and this was promoted by adaptations to their home. Another took part in social events such as tea parties and massage sessions. Some relatives told us they would like more regular updates about activities, as they did not always receive feedback from staff on day to day engagement and a yearly breakdown of their family members expenditure.
Relatives described staff as kind and supportive and new staff introduced themselves, staff recognised when people returned from visits and showed warmth towards them. Staff used basic signing to help people communicate. One relative highlighted how staff supported the family following a person’s death and attended the funeral. People’s cultural and religious needs were respected.