During an assessment under our new approach
Date of assessment: 5 to 7 May 2026. Highfield Farm provides personal care to people living in a 'supported living' setting, so they can live as independently as possible. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment 13 people were living at the service. Of these 3 people using the service received support with personal care. Staff supported older people and younger adults, with different health needs.
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 service was meeting the principles of Right support, right care, right culture’. This assessment was undertaken to give the service it’s first rating. The service has been rated good.
Systems were in place to keep people safe, although some improvements were needed. Incident reporting processes were in place but had not always been followed; action had been taken to address this. People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse, and risks had been assessed and managed with clear care plans in place. Environmental and fire safety systems were in place and well maintained. There were enough safely recruited staff with mandatory training, although some specialised training was still required. The service was clean, and infection control measures were followed. Medicines had generally been managed safely, but some ‘as required’ protocols had been incomplete and were promptly addressed.
People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans reflected their preferences, including how to manage anxiety and distress. Care had been delivered in line with best practice, and people had access to health professionals. Staff had worked well with each other and external professionals, and improvements to team culture were ongoing. People had been supported to maintain their health, access community services, and develop independence, including employment and education opportunities. Consent had generally been sought; however, one concern about staff not always respecting privacy had been identified and addressed.
People had received person-centred care that reflected their preferences and interests, with detailed care plans guiding staff on how to support individual needs. People had been supported to access healthcare services and community opportunities, including employment, volunteering and education. Staff had worked with external professionals to ensure joined-up care.
The service had experienced recent changes which had impacted the culture; however, improvements had been made and staff told us they felt supported and worked well together. There was a new manager in post who had begun implementing improvements. People and staff felt able to raise concerns, and systems were in place to seek and act on feedback. Governance systems were established, including regular audits and clear plans for managing risks and emergencies. Equality and inclusion were promoted, although some supervision had been overdue and was being addressed. The provider had worked in partnership with the community and external agencies, and had systems in place to support continuous learning, improvement and service development.