- Care home
Elizabeth Road Care Home
Assessment report published 23 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
The service is a care home. There were 5 people using the service at the time of the inspection.
This is a specialist service for people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.
We 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 received respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities most people take for granted.
We carried out this assessment on 8 and 14 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.
People received safe, personalised and well-coordinated care from staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs and preferences. Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing were appropriately assessed, monitored and reviewed, with people and those important to them involved in decisions about their care. There were enough suitably skilled and competent staff to meet people's needs safely, and medicines were managed effectively through robust systems and oversight.
The provider promoted people's independence, choice and control, ensuring care and support reflected their wishes, goals and diverse needs. People were able to access the care and support they required in a timely way, with reasonable adjustments made to promote equitable experiences and outcomes. Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and were confident in recognising and reporting concerns, helping to protect people from the risk of abuse.
There was a positive and inclusive culture across the service. Staff felt valued and supported through training, supervision and development opportunities and were able to raise concerns openly. Leaders promoted a culture of learning and continuous improvement, using incidents, complaints and feedback to drive positive change. Effective governance and quality assurance systems enabled leaders to maintain oversight of the service, identify areas for improvement and take timely action. Managers and staff worked collaboratively with health and social care partners to support continuity of care and achieve positive outcomes for people.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with people living at the home, family members and staff, and observed interactions between people and staff during our visits. Where people were unable to fully communicate their experiences verbally, we gathered evidence through observations of their care and support, reviews of care records, and discussions with family members and staff who knew them well.
People appeared relaxed and comfortable around staff and regularly sought them out for support, reassurance and conversation. We observed positive non-verbal responses, including smiles, laughter, eye contact and engagement with staff, which indicated people were comfortable and had positive relationships with those supporting them.
People responded positively when asked whether they liked living at the home and felt safe. One person told us, “Yes I do,” while another person responded by nodding and smiling.
Family members consistently spoke positively about the care provided and the approach of staff. One family member told us, “Each and every one of them [staff] are amazing and so welcoming,” and “I couldn’t ask for better care for [relative’s name].” They added, “They care for and look after [relative’s name] so well and always involve us in any decisions and changes.”
Another family member described the service as a “Fantastic place, great care,” and told us, “Staff are all fantastic, very caring and very respectful, can’t praise them enough.” They said their relative was “Very safe,” which gave them “100% peace of mind.”
A further family member told us, “Really excellent, [relative’s name] is well looked after and very comfortable.” They also said staff were “Very good at keeping us up to date about [relative’s name],” and described their relative as “Very safe indeed, couldn’t ask for a better place.”
Staff knew people well and delivered care in line with their individual preferences, life histories, cultural needs and personal goals. Care records contained detailed information about what was important to people, their preferred routines and how they wished to receive support. Staff were able to describe people's likes, dislikes and preferred ways of communicating. People were supported to maintain hobbies, interests and relationships important to them, helping them to retain a sense of identity and purpose.
People were offered meaningful choices throughout the day. They chose when to get up, where to spend their time, what they wanted to eat and drink, what activities they wished to participate in and how they received their care and support. We observed staff offering choices in ways people could understand and respecting decisions, including where people chose not to participate in activities or wished to spend time alone.
People's privacy, dignity and respect were promoted. Staff knocked before entering bedrooms, addressed people respectfully and spoke discreetly when discussing private matters. During observations, staff supported people sensitively and ensured personal care was provided in a manner which maintained privacy and dignity.
Relationships between people and staff were warm, caring and respectful. Staff demonstrated kindness, patience and humour and took time to engage with people in meaningful conversations. We observed occasions where staff provided reassurance when people appeared anxious or uncertain, remaining calm and supportive. These interactions helped people feel valued, safe and emotionally supported, not just physically cared for.
People were supported to have choice, control and as much independence as possible. Risks were managed in a way which enabled people to continue doing things that mattered to them rather than unnecessarily restricting them. Where support was required, staff encouraged people to do as much as they could for themselves, promoting confidence and independence.
Activities and engagement focused on enhancing people's wellbeing and quality of life rather than simply occupying time. People were supported to take part in meaningful activities, maintain social relationships and access their local community where appropriate. Staff understood what brought people enjoyment and adapted support to reflect individual interests and abilities.