Updated 9 March 2026
Date of assessment, 11 of March to the 23 March 2026.
Bishops Corner is a care home providing residential care for up to nine adults with learning disabilities. They provide residential care for people with Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS). There were 9 people currently living in the service.
This service was last inspected in 2017 and rated Good. This inspection was planned and undertaken due to the age of the rating. At this inspection, whilst we found improvements were needed, the rating of the service has remained Good, as outcomes for people were positive.
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.
Although staff knew people living at the service well, care plans and risk assessments were generic and not specific to each person. Some health conditions were not identified in the persons care plan, though staff were able to tell us about them. The service had recently moved to a computerised care plan system, and some information had been lost during the transition. We shared these findings with the registered manager who took immediate action to ensure that care plans were reviewed. There were systems and processes in place to record accidents and incidents, however the records did not look at themes, trends and lessons learnt to mitigate future risks. The registered manager was in the process of making improvements to the management of medicines in line with current best practice guidance.
Audits were in place and were being used by the management team to drive improvement. However they had not identified some of the shortfalls found. The registered manager took immediate action to make improvements where issues had the potential to impact on safe outcomes for people. For example, specific care documentation and risk assessments and medicine management. Despite the shortfalls found and discussed, due to staff knowledge, staff at this time provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.
During the assessment there was a positive culture of safety, based on openness and transparency. People received safe care and staff managed risks safely. There were a sufficient number of suitably trained staff. Staff were recruited safely. People and staff told us they would feel confident to raise any concerns and that these would be responded to by the management team. There was an openness from staff that things had been a challenge with management changes but with the new manager, they felt they could speak up and be listened to. The provider had liaised with external health professionals to provide joined up care and treatment for people. This had promoted safe transitions for people moving between different services. The premises were well maintained. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was used appropriately. People enjoyed their meals and were supported by staff to follow a healthy lifestyle within a risk assessment framework.
Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and there was a positive and open culture in the service. With no exception the staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported and ensured that people were happy and fulfilled.
Systems were in place that allowed people, relatives and staff to speak up and have their voices heard.