- Independent mental health service
Bradley Complex Care
Assessment report published 12 May 2026
Contents
Ratings - Long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 13 to 19 January 2026.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
We rated the service as requires improvement. The service was previously rated good.
We found that governance process did not always operate effectively. Medicines management systems were not always effective, audits in place were not always effective and freedom to speak up processes were not integrated effectively within the service. However, people were supported to have choice and control, were involved in planning their care and staff were fully invested in clients’ wellbeing. The service identified and supported the wider health needs of clients, wellbeing and communication needs. The service worked in collaboration with external partners, and the organisation encouraged improvement initiatives.
Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary
All staff completed mandatory training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS), Mental Health Act, the Code of Practice and the guiding principles.
The staff we spoke with had a good understanding of mental capacity and were confident about how to assess it. Staff told us they took all practical steps to enable people to make their own decisions and provided good examples regarding raising safeguarding concerns.
People using the service had easy access to information about independent mental health advocacy.
We reviewed 6 care records and found evidence that people's needs were met in line with current guidance and by undertaking capacity assessments and best interest decisions when appropriate. All detained patients were made aware of their rights and restrictions were regularly reviewed to maximise their independence. However, we found some issues with consent to treatment documentation which indicated that the service could not be assured that medication was always administered with lawful authority.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 3 people using the service and received feedback from 3 families.
People using the service spoke with us about activities they undertook and how they enjoyed these. One person told us about learning sounds and how they had been practicing these to help them communicate their needs to the staff.
People using the service told us about positive relationships with staff and told us, “I like all the staff they help keep me calm”. Two people we spoke with told us how they supported staff interviews and asked questions that were important to them.
People using the service were positive about the food.
However, families told us that the hospital did not always communicate as timely as people would like and sometimes, they had to make multiple requests.