- Independent mental health service
ABBI Clinic Manchester
Assessment report published 12 August 2026
Contents
Ratings - Specialist eating disorder services
Our view of the service
We rated the service as Good. The service provided treatment that met the needs of patients with an eating disorder in a community setting.
Feedback from patients and their families was positive. Patients felt meaningfully involved in their treatment.
Leaders in the service were involved in developing evidence based guidance for eating disorders and contributed to research and the development of national strategy.
However, the service was in breach of Regulation 17 Good Governance in relation to staff and directors files, oversight and mitigation of environmental risks and lack of clear framework of what must be discussed at a team and senior level. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary
100% of staff had had training in the Mental Capacity Act.
Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, in particular the five statutory principles.
The provider had a policy on the Mental Capacity Act, including deprivation of liberty safeguards. The policy also included considerations for children and young people, including Gillick competence. Staff were aware of the policy and had access to it.
Staff knew where to get advice from within the provider regarding the Mental Capacity Act.
Staff took all practical steps to enable patients to make their own decisions. Information was made more accessible including easy read and more visual information.
The nominated individual had overall responsibility to monitor adherence to the Mental Capacity Act.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 5 patients, 4 carers and received feedback from 2 stakeholders.
Patients told us that staff were supportive and approachable. Regular one-to-one sessions took place and provided an opportunity to reflect on their progress.
Patients felt listened to by the staff. Patients told us that the service were responsive if there were any changes required.
Patients felt in control of their treatment and could decide if family members were involved or not.
Patients were involved in goal setting and felt that their treatment progressed at their pace.
Patients told us that the service was excellent at focusing on eating disorder treatment, however, would like more focus on life in recovery and how to cope in the future.
Patients also said the delivery of groups in a hybrid format (with some people joining in-person and some people joining remotely) was not effective as it was difficult for everyone to participate.
An area for development from patients was that a timetable would be helpful to know what was happening when in the service.
Patients also told us of difficulties accessing the dietician and that there could be a wait for a review of their meal plan.
Carers felt involved in their relative’s care. They attended reviews with patient consent. Carers told us the service was responsive to feedback.
Carers valued the parent carer forum that the service offered.
Carers told us that the service made reasonable adjustments for people who were autistic.
Carers told us that it would be helpful to have information about how to respond at home if their loved one was deteriorating. They also told us they would like more information at the point of discharge about next steps.
Stakeholders told us how the service was embracing changes in technology and had been involved in a study funded by the Greater Manchester Business Hub to assess the person-centredness of AI care planning. Stakeholders also told us they had received positive feedback from patients and that the service focused on outcomes with patients.