Platinum Care Services

Updated 3 June 2026

Date of Assessment: 15 June to 07 July 2026. We visited the home on 15, 22 and 23 June 2026, additional information and evidence were reviewed remotely. We looked at all 5 Key Questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.The service is a residential care home providing support to up to 8 people with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of the assessment 8 people were living at the service. The assessment was carried out due to the age rating for the service, and we also received some information of concern.

At this inspection we found 2 breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, and good governance. Following this inspection the overall rating has changed from good to requires improvement.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. This guidance supported judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choice, independence and access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the provider was not consistently meeting the principles of Right support, right care, right culture. People’s needs, preferences, aspirations and outcomes were not always reviewed in accordance with its principles. This limited people’s opportunity to live an ordinary life and be supported in ways that reflected their individual choices and goals.Risks to people were not always assessed, monitored or managed effectively. Environmental safety checks and fire safety arrangements were not robust. The home was not clean and well organised. Governance systems were in place but were not always effective and did not always address shortfalls in a timely way. People’s care records did not consistently detail goals, aspirations or opportunities for people to build their independence or develop new skills.

Our observations of staff were mixed. We saw some warm, caring and respectful interactions. However, we also saw poor interactions or times with limited or no engagement with people. The registered manager and staff we spoke with had detailed knowledge of people’s care and support needs. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends and regular reviews of people’s care took place. Medicines were well managed and people’s healthcare needs were met. Staff were recruited safely. People were supported to access the local community.

The provider took action during the inspection to address the concerns we shared with them. We saw these improvements had been made on day 2 and day 3 of our visit. This included bringing forward some planned repairs and maintenance work; deep cleaning the home; replacing worn furnishings; improving cleaning practices; replacing fire doors; improving the maintenance of the garden and making it accessible and safe; replacing restrictors on 3 windows; addressing the odour in several parts of the home; improving food storage; removing rubbish and a skip from outside the home; and refurbishing the laundry and making a clean and dirty work flow.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment and the breaches of regulation 12 and 17.

Updated 3 June 2026

People were confident to approach staff and appeared comfortable around them.Relatives spoke positively about the home and the difference it had made to the lives of their family members. Feedback was positive, with relatives expressing their satisfaction with both the staff team and the registered manager. Relatives told us they were confident to approach the registered manager and felt the staff team worked hard to provide their family members with a positive experience. A relative told us, “I believe there are always enough staff on duty, [person’s name] has numerous staff with whom he resonates with, I have no issues with staff turnover or agency staff, they all seem to know [person’s name] well and their needs and requirements are always met. I feel they are well cared for, safe and treated with dignity and respect, I am so grateful to the staff and management.”

Some people could not directly tell us about their experiences. We spent time at the service and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.We observed differing levels and types of interaction across the assessment period. Some staff engaged well and some staff had little or no engagement with people. The provider told us staff adapt their approach to each person's communication needs and assessed level of stimulation, including through low-arousal interaction.