- Care home
Merecroft
Assessment report published 20 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 22 September 2026.
Merecroft is a residential care home supporting younger adults with mental health needs, learning disabilities and autistic people. The service is registered to support 9 people across 2 buildings. The main house accommodates 8 people and there is a self-contained bungalow in the grounds which provides separate accommodation for 1 person. At the time of our inspection there were 8 people using the service.
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.
The assessment was carried out in part in response to concerns received about how people were supported when experiencing heightened distress and anxiety. During the inspection, we found no evidence of these concerns which placed people at risk of harm. Accidents and incidents were reviewed, lessons were shared, and improvements were made to reduce future risks. Safeguarding systems were robust, staff understood how to keep people safe, and concerns were reported appropriately. People were involved in managing risks, with support tailored to their individual needs while maintaining choice and independence.
The environment was safe and well maintained, with fire safety measures, personalised evacuation plans, and appropriate risk controls in place. There were sufficient staffing levels, safe recruitment practices, and ongoing training and supervision to support staff in their roles.
Infection prevention and control measures were effective, and medicines were managed safely, with regular reviews and clear guidance for staff to ensure people received them safely.
People’s needs were assessed and care was generally planned and delivered in line with current legislation and evidence-based practice. Care plans reflected people’s assessed needs and provided staff with guidance to support positive outcomes. Effective systems were in place to support communication between staff and partner agencies, helping to ensure continuity of care and support people to maintain their health and wellbeing. Staff monitored people’s wellbeing, supported access to healthcare services, promoted healthier lifestyles, and sought consent in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect, and received care and support which reflected their individual needs, preferences and backgrounds. Staff knew people well, promoted independence, choice and control, and responded promptly and sensitively to changing needs and signs of distress. Care plans provided clear guidance to support consistent care, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s preferences and support needs. Staff felt valued and well supported by the registered manager, which helped promote a positive culture and the delivery of person-centred care.
People received care from staff who tailored their support to meet individual needs, preferences and communication styles. People were involved in decisions about their care and had access to healthcare and support services. However, end-of-life planning needed to be developed to ensure people’s preferences were recorded for the future.
The service was led by a registered manager who promoted a positive, person-centred culture based on openness, inclusion and respect for people’s rights. Staff spoke positively about the support they received and felt confident raising concerns, with systems in place to ensure feedback was listened to and acted upon. Relatives provided positive feedback about the leadership and communication. Effective governance arrangements, clear accountability, partnership working and a commitment to learning and continuous improvement helped ensure people received safe, high-quality care.
People's experience of this service
We spent time observing interactions between people and staff to help us understand the experience of people who could not speak with us. We sought feedback from relatives and external professionals who worked with the service. We received limited responses from external health professionals.
People had access to a large outdoor space and engaged in activities, both within the home and in the community, which were meaningful to them. Staff spoke about people with affection and demonstrated a good understanding of what was important to them.
People’s health and well-being were monitored, and support was provided to enable them to access healthcare services when required. Referrals were made to appropriate healthcare professionals, and staff followed any advice provided.
Feedback from relatives regarding their involvement in care planning and reviews was mixed, indicating the provider had not always ensured people and those important to them were consistently involved in reviewing care and support. The registered manager had planned individual meetings with families to strengthen engagement in care reviews.
Relatives were welcome to visit at any time, with no restrictions in place. One relative said, “We don’t tell them when we’re coming or we do tell them if I’ve got a reason.”
We saw positive feedback from family members about the family barbecue held in August. Analysis of the feedback showed families felt communication was good and they were welcomed and included by the staff team. Families also expressed enthusiasm for the planned Christmas gathering and said they would like more seasonal and social events like this in the future.