- Care home
Elm Tree House
Assessment report published 21 August 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 26 June to 7 August 2026.
Elm Tree house is a care home providing the regulated activity accommodation for people who require nursing or personal care to up to eight people. The service provides support to autistic people and people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection, there were 8 people using the service.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee how autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture is the statutory guidance which supports Care Quality Commission (CQC) to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.
We carried out this assessment to follow up on breaches identified in the previous assessment and to check whether improvements had been made. Since the previous assessment, improvements had been made to person centred care and good governance arrangements. As a result, the service was no longer in breach of these regulations.
Overall, people received safe care and support. Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were assessed, monitored and managed effectively. Care plans provided clear guidance for staff and reflected people’s individual needs and preferences.
The provider had effective oversight of the service and used governance systems to monitor, identify concerns and drive improvements. Staff were recruited safely, received appropriate training, and had the skills and knowledge needed to support people safely and effectively.
People and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care and were supported to make choices about their daily lives. Staff worked closely with health care professionals to ensure people’s health needs were identified and responded to promptly. Medicines were managed safely, and people had access to health care services and specialist support when required.
The environment was clean, well maintained, homely and safe. People were supported to develop and maintain their independence and were encouraged to take part in activities, hobbies and community opportunities that reflected their interests and preferences.The service demonstrated the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture by promoting people’s choice, independence, wellbeing and inclusion within their local community.
People's experience of this service
One person said they enjoyed living in the home and liked the staff. They felt staff knew and understood them well and said there were always activities and opportunities to go out.
Another person spoke positively about the support they received. The told us staff were helping them work towards stopping smoking and supporting their goal of becoming more independent, for example going to the shop.
People were described by their relatives as happy living at the service and keen to return after visits with family, suggesting they felt settled and comfortable in their home.
Staff were consistently praised for being caring, friendly, respectful and knowledgeable about people’s individual needs.
Relatives felt staff knew people well and understood how to support them, including during periods of anxiety and distress.
Relatives told us people were supported to maintain and develop their independence, including making their beds, tidying their rooms, helping with cooking, shopping and making choices about daily life.
Relatives told us the service was proactive in supporting people’s healthcare needs, including arranging dentist, optician and GP appointments, annual health checks, vaccinations and medication management.
People were supported to access their local community regularly through trips to cafes, shopping, museums, pubs, arts and crafts and other activities meaningful to the person.
Relatives described the environment as safe, homely and well managed, and felt confident staff would respond appropriately if people were at risk.
However, one relative felt improvements could be made around communication, for example one relative said information had not been passed on or recorded, such as planned visits, appointments or transport arrangements. One relative was unsure how to make a complaint if they needed to.
Another relative felt there could be more structured and stimulating activities, particularly since the departure of a dedicated activities coordinator.
One relative raised a concern regarding compatibility with another resident and reported occasions where agreed arrangements to keep people apart had not always been followed. The manager confirmed they were aware of this concern and confirmed how people were kept safe during times of distress.