• Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

3 The Beeches

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

3 Beech Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5ER (0161) 302 0577

Provided and run by:
Sanctum Healthcare Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment of Community mental health services for people with a learning disability or autism

We inspected 3 The Beeches on 24 February 2026.

3 The Beeches provides a community assessment service for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and treatment packages for people with a confirmed diagnosis of ADHD. Assessments were provided for adults, children and young people. Patients could visit the service at their office, but many appointments were carried out remotely. 

The service provides support for people who have a diagnosis of ADHD and co-occurring addictive behaviours including moderate alcohol use. 

The service also provides autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) assessments, but not treatment, and other services such as coaching which are not regulated by CQC.

Staff assessed and managed risks to patients and themselves well. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and the service worked with other agencies to do so. However, staff had not all received the appropriate level of training to identify potential safeguarding concerns. The service used systems and processes to safely prescribe medicines. The service managed patient safety incidents well. The building was safe, clean, well-furnished and maintained, and fit for purpose.

Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all patients. They developed individual care plans which were reviewed regularly through multidisciplinary discussion and updated as needed. Staff provided a range of treatment and care for patients based on national guidance and best practice. The staff team included or had access to the specialists required to meet the needs of patients. 

Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness. They respected patients’ privacy and dignity. They understood the individual needs of patients and supported patients to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. Staff involved patients in care planning and risk assessment and actively sought their feedback on the quality of care provided. Staff informed and involved families and carers appropriately.

Staff managed access to the service well. The service met the needs of all patients, including those with a protected characteristic. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously and investigated them. The service asked patients for feedback about the service.

We rated the service as good. The service had made improvements and was no longer in breach of the regulations identified at the last inspection. Staff could now access policies and procedures, which were regularly reviewed. The service now had a vision and values that staff were aware of. The building was now appropriately risk assessed and any areas of concern were addressed promptly. There were now appropriate first aid arrangements in place. The service now had robust governance processes, and a risk register that was reviewed regularly. Staff now had regularly documented supervision. 

However, the service was in breach of regulations with regards to staff not always receiving the appropriate level of safeguarding training that was necessary for their role and contact with patients. 

Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary

The provider had policies and procedures to ensure that patients or their parents could give informed consent, and where applicable, followed the Mental Capacity Act. Staff recorded capacity and consent in the care records. Staff were aware of these policies and procedures. 

Staff took all practical steps to enable patients to make their own decisions. For patients who might have impaired mental capacity, staff assessed and recorded capacity to consent appropriately. They did this on a decision-specific basis, usually in relation to medicines. 

If a patient lacked capacity or was too young to make decisions for themselves the staff would work with others in their best interests, recognising the importance of the person’s wishes, feelings, culture and history. 

During an assessment of the hospital overall

We inspected 3 The Beeches on 24 February 2026. 3 The Beeches was previously inspected in November 2022 and was rated as requires improvement.

3 The Beeches registered with CQC in March 2022 to deliver the regulated activities: treatment of disease, disorder or injury; and diagnostic and screening procedures. The service did not have a Registered Manager at the time of our inspection, an application was in progress which was subsequently approved. 

At this inspection we inspected the service’s only assessment service group of community mental health services with learning disabilities or autism.

15 & 16 November 2022

During a routine inspection

This was the first inspection for this location. We rated it as requires improvement because:

  • The service did not have robust governance processes that provided appropriate assurance to managers about the safety and effectiveness of the service.
  • There were a number of policies awaiting review or in the process of being reviewed. These had not been updated in line with the change in service model or to reflect the current organisational structures or leadership. It was not always clear about who had certain specific responsibilities within the organisation.
  • The service did not have a vision and values underlying the work being undertaken by the service and staff; that would support the consistency of responses and services being provided to patients.
  • The service did not have processes for routinely gathering patient and family feedback about the service or their experiences of assessment and treatment.
  • The service had not developed outcomes or key performance indicators that they routinely reviewed or reported on, although patient progress was tracked on an individual level.
  • Formal supervision records were not being kept and there was no evidence as to how frequently supervision had been taking place. It was not clear how the service was supporting staff with continuous professional development.
  • The service did not have appropriate first aid arrangements within the building as per the minimum requirements set out by the Health and Safety Executive in respect of first aid. The service did not have all appropriate health and safety assessments to ensure any risks associated with the building were being managed.

However:

  • Patients gave positive feedback about staff and their experiences of the service. Patients felt the staff were responsive. Staff were attentive to patients and families when they contacted the service and responded to patients in a kind and pleasant manner.
  • During assessments, Families were being involved in assessments and could provide their input and opinion.
  • There was evidence of ongoing review of patients using monitoring tools to review the individual’s progress and development.
  • The service utilised patient background and feedback as part of the assessment process; gathering information from additional sources where possible.
  • The service had begun to develop clinical governance meetings which reflected the beginning of positive change regarding governance. Managers were open and honest about the limitations of the service in this area.