• Care Home
  • Care home

Harvey Lane

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

9 Harvey Lane, Norwich, Norfolk, NR7 0BG (01603) 304655

Provided and run by:
Consensus Support Services Limited

Assessment report published 26 March 2026

Ratings

  • Overall

    Requires improvement

  • Safe

    Requires improvement

  • Effective

    Requires improvement

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Date of assessment: 09 December 2025 to16 January 2026.

 

Harvey Lane is residential care home providing personal care for up to 8 people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. At the commencement of the inspection, 6 Service Users were living at the service and receiving the regulated activity.

We undertook this unannounced comprehensive onsite assessment to check whether people were receiving safe, effective and responsive care from staff who were caring and well-led. We reviewed all quality statements.

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 respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

 

We found the service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to person-centred care, consent to care, safe care and treatment and governance. Although improvements were seen at this assessment, the provider remained in breach of the legal regulations in relation to good governance, which demonstrated a failure to learn and embed improvements from previous regulatory action.

 

Systems to monitor people’s risks were not always effective. Staff recorded incidents, including near-misses and physical violence towards staff. However, records sometimes lacked information. Incidents were not reviewed on a regular basis to identify opportunities for learning. This meant opportunities were missed to mitigate future risks and to improve the care people received. Some health monitoring records were poorly completed; records showed people did not always have enough to drink. People’s support plans were not always detailed enough and contained some inconsistencies.

 

The provider did not always follow the Mental Capacity Act2005.This is a key piece of legislation that protects and empowers people who may lack the mental capacity to make their own choices and decisions regarding care and treatment. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were vague, lacked decision-specific detail and did not consistently evidence people’s involvement or appropriate consultation with others, placing people at risk of decisions being made without legal safeguards.

We found that staff were caring and supported people in a kind and considerate manner. People were supported to access the community and staff worked well with healthcare professionals.

 

In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.

People's experience of this service

People had the hours of support they had been assessed to need, were supported to access the community and to be involved in their activity planning.

People we spoke with were happy with the support they received and were proud of their personal environments.

Relatives felt that people were happy and safe living at the service, with positive feedback about the staff. However, we received mixed feedback in relation to communication and being involved.