- Independent mental health service
Cygnet Manor
Assessment report published 3 December 2025
Contents
Ratings - Wards for people with learning disabilities or autism
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 14, 15 and 16 October 2025
Cygnet Manor is a high dependency rehabilitation hospital that provides a service for up to 20 men with learning disabilities and/or autism, people who are expressing emotional distress and mental health needs. Some people at the hospital are detained under the Mental Health Act. The provider is Cygnet Learning Disabilities Midlands Limited.
At the time of our assessment the service was supporting 11 people.
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/or autistic people had respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
The service was last rated as Good (published May 2022). This was an unannounced assessment, which means the provider was not told an assessment was going to be taking place beforehand. During this assessment, we looked at all quality statements across all 5 key questions. As we assessed all quality statements at this visit, the current rating reflects the findings from this assessment. We rated this service as Good.
Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance
Mental Health Act
Ninety seven percent of staff had received training and had a good understanding of the Mental Health Act, the Code of Practice and the guiding principles. Overall staff demonstrated a good understanding of these. Staff had easy access to administrative support and legal advice on implementation of the Mental Health Act and its Code of Practice. Staff knew who their Mental Health Act administrators were.
Staff had easy access to local Mental Health Act policies and procedures and to the Code of Practice. People had easy access to information about independent mental health advocacy.
Staff explained to people their rights under the Mental Health Act in a way that they understood, repeated it as required and recorded that they had done so. Staff were able to ensure that people were always able to take Section 17 leave (permission for people to leave hospital) when this had been agreed.
Staff requested an opinion from a second opinion appointed doctor when necessary. Staff stored copies of people’s detention papers and associated records (for example, Section 17 leave forms) correctly and so they were available to all staff that needed access to them.
Staff did regular audits to ensure the Mental Health Act was being applied correctly and there was evidence of learning from those audits.
Mental Capacity Act
Ninety five percent of staff of staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, in particular the 5 statutory principles
The provider had a policy on the Mental Capacity Act, including deprivation of liberty safeguards. Staff were aware of the policy and had access to it. Staff knew where to get advice from within the service regarding the Mental Capacity Act, including deprivation of liberty safeguards.
Staff took all practical steps to enable people to make their own decisions. For people who might have impaired mental capacity, staff had assessed and recorded capacity to consent appropriately. They did this on a decision-specific basis with regard to significant decisions.
When people lacked capacity, relatives and staff made decisions in their best interests, recognising the importance of the person’s wishes, feelings, culture and history. The service had arrangements to monitor adherence to the Mental Capacity Act.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 7 people and 4 of their relatives. People’s feedback was positive about the quality of care and treatment they received. They felt safe, supported and well cared for by staff, who were described as kind, compassionate, caring and approachable. Staff were attentive to people’s needs and supported them in a respectful and dignified way, ensuring they felt listened to, involved and valued throughout their care and treatment journey.
People and their relatives told us staff were always visible, available and responsive to their needs by offering support, listening effectively and responding without delay to meet the needs of the people they cared for. Relatives told us staff communicated well with them and kept them updated about their loved ones’ progress and regularly updated them with any care and treatment information. They also felt that staff considered and approached people’s physical health with the same importance as their mental health.
People and their families, participated in developing care and risk management plans. A collaborative approach ensured that care was person-centred, and treatment was amended to meet peoples’ individual needs, preferences, circumstances and expectations.
The service offered a comprehensive range of therapeutic activities which were well-attended by people, helping to promote engagement, recovery and inclusion. People told us the activities supported their recovery and rehabilitation and provided a good daily structure, which offered meaningful engagement and contributed positively to their physical, mental and emotional well-being.
People were given support to raise complaints or concerns and to share feedback, they felt listened to and empowered. People told us the food was of very good quality, with a variety of options available to them which suited individual preferences, religious or cultural needs and specific dietary requirements. If the choice of menu did not suit a person’s preference, they were able and supported to request an alternative meal which was cooked freshly for them.