The Langford Centre

Updated 29 October 2026

An assessment of The Langford Centre took place on 17 and 18 March 2026 using our Single Assessment Framework. As part of the assessment, we visited the service on 17 and 18 March 2026. We decided to conduct an assessment covering 33 quality statements across the five key questions to assess whether the service was Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well led, because it was rated Requires improvement overall and in all five key questions since our last inspection in July 2024.

The Langford Centre was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in 2011 to deliver the following regulated activities:

• Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
• Diagnostic and screening procedures.
• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

The service had a newly appointed hospital director at the time of this assessment, but the registered manager had not changed. The new hospital director was already working at The Langford Centre prior to this appointment.

The Langford Centre is an independent mental health hospital in Bexhill-on-Sea East Sussex, providing care and treatment to working-age adults with severe mental illness. The Langford Centre provides low secure forensic services and acute inpatient mental health services to male and female working-age adults. The service is provided by The Langford Clinic Limited.

The hospital is purpose built with 47 beds over three wards. Since our last assessment, the provider had closed two wards. We visited all 3 wards as part of this assessment, Cooden, Fairlight and Pevensey wards. Cooden was an acute ward for males supporting up to 15 patients. Fairlight was an acute ward for females supporting up to 16 patients. Pevensey was a low secure forensic ward for males supporting up to 16 patients.

We assessed this service under the assessment service groups of acute wards for adults of working age and psychiatric intensive care units, and forensic inpatient or secure wards.

We rated the service as requires improvement. At this assessment we identified breaches of regulations: 12 Safe Care and Treatment and 17 Good Governance. In the acute wards for adults of working age and psychiatric intensive care units we found two breaches of regulations in relation to safe environments and medicines optimisation, and governance. In the forensic inpatient ward we found a breach in relation to governance.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
 

Updated 23 December 2025

We undertook an assessment of the Langford Centre between 17 March 2026 and 18 March 2026 using our Single Assessment Framework. We decided to conduct an assessment covering 33 quality statements across the five key questions to assess whether the service was Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well Led. The service was last inspected in June 2024. At that inspection we rated the service as Requires improvement overall. With ratings of Good under the Effective and Responsive key questions, and Requires improvement under the Safe, Caring and Well Led key questions.

The Langford Centre was operated by Langford Clinic Limited and was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in 2010 to deliver the following regulated activities:

• Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983
• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury
• Diagnostics and screening procedure

The service had a controlled drugs accountable officer and a registered manager.

At our last inspection we found 2 breaches of regulations:

• At our last inspection in 2024 we found that the providers’ governance process did not identify all potential risks at the hospital. At this inspection we found that the governance process had improved but still had not identified all the risks present at the hospital.
• At this inspection we found that the provider had not ensured that all risks within the environment were identified and mitigated. New ligature risks were not identified by staff, a cupboard containing both water pipes and electrical circuits was left unlocked in a communal bathroom, there was no privacy screening curtain in the communal bathroom and not all bedroom windows had privacy screening on them. The provider had not ensured that governance process identified all issues with the care environment. Daily environmental checks did not identify changes to the environment that placed patients at risk of harm. New ligature points had not been identified on the ward. The annual ligature assessment was not updated correctly and still included items that had been removed from the ward.
• At the last inspection we found that standards of cleanliness and hygiene needed improvement, the sash style windows had not been replaced and continued to pose a risk to patient safety, medicines were not always managed safely, and some staff had not received appropriate training to carry out aspects of their role. At this inspection we found that staff carried out daily checks to ensure the ward was clean and tidy these were reviewed by monthly checks completed by the ward manager. The provider had replaced the sash windows or had mitigated the risk while the windows were waiting to be replaced.

At this inspection we rated the service as Requires improvement. We rated Safe and Well-led key questions as Requires improvement and Effective, Caring and Responsive as Good. We found 2 breaches of regulations:

• Regulation 12: Safe care and treatment (2)(d)(g). Staff had not identified a fixed-point ligature. Staff had left a cupboard containing waterpipes and a fuse box unlocked. Staff did not always follow processes to manage medicines safely.
• Regulation 17: Good governance (2)(b). Local audits did not always effectively identify new risks within the environment.

Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary

• All staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act and understood the five guiding principles and 97% had received training on the Mental Health Act.
• Staff could get support around the Mental Capacity and Mental Health Acts if needed.
• When a patient lacked capacity staff would made best interest decisions on a decision specific basis.
• The provider undertook regular audits of their compliance to the Mental health Act.
  
   

Updated 23 December 2025

At our last assessment we rated the forensic inpatient service as Requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good.

People were safe and protected from avoidable harm. The service was clean and fit for purpose. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. The service was fully staffed and staff were up to date with their training. Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all patients on admission, and they developed individual care plans. Staff provided a range of treatment and care for patients based on national guidance and best practice. The ward team included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of patients on the ward. People were supported and treated with dignity and respect. Staff involved patients in care planning and risk assessment, and informed and involved families and carers appropriately. Staff supported patients with activities outside the service, such as work, education and family relationships. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the result. Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles. Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and had access to the information they needed to provide safe and effective care.

However, the service was in breach of regulation for the governance at the service. Governance processes did not always operate effectively. For example, the environmental checks and audits staff completed were not always sufficient to provide assurance. We found some issues with medicines governance and oversight. Issues raised by patients in community meetings were not always followed up.

Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary

Mental Health Act

Staff were trained in and had a good understanding of the Mental Health Act, the Code of Practice and the guiding principles. The provider had relevant policies and procedures that reflected the most recent guidance that staff had easy access to. Patients had easy access to information about independent Mental Health Act advocacy. Staff explained to patients their rights under the Mental Health Act in a way that they could understand. Staff stored copies of patients' detention papers and associated records appropriately.

Mental Capacity Act

Staff were trained in and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and the five statutory principles. The provider had a policy on the Mental Capacity Act, including deprivation of liberty safeguards. Staff took all practical steps to enable patients to make their own decisions. When patients lacked capacity, staff made decisions in their best interests. The service had arrangements to monitor adherence to the Mental Capacity Act.

Updated 25 June 2024

The Langford Centre provides low secure forensic, high-dependency rehabilitation and acute inpatient mental health services to male and female working-age adults. Most patients are detained under the Mental Health Act (1983). The service is provided by Bramley Health Limited. The hospital is purpose built and provides seventy-six beds over six wards.

In this assessment we reviewed the care on the long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults assessment group, which consisted of Seaford Ward.

We assessed twelve quality statements from the safe and well-led key questions.

The assessment group of long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults was assessed in a comprehensive inspection in March 2023. During the March 2023 inspection, the long stay or rehabilitation wards were rated Requires Improvement in Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well Led and Good in Caring.

In the 2023 inspection we found that the rehabilitation wards were in breach of Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act concerning person centred care:

• We found that the care plans did not reflect patients’ personal goals and that patient and carer involvement should be recorded in the care plans where possible.
• We also identified that the rehabilitation wards did not follow a model of care and that the service should develop their plans to review the inpatient rehabilitation model.

We conducted this focussed assessment in July 2024 following a number of reported concerns relating to the safety of patients and staff, the culture on the wards and the overall management of the hospital.

During this assessment we identified 3 further breaches relating to the running of the ward.

• The provider did not ensure that patients had free access to fresh air. Patients on Seaford were dependent on staff being available to support them for access fresh to air. (Regulation 13)
• The management of the fire safety of the ward was compromised due to the staff not being able to open the boxes containing the firefighting equipment. (Regulation 12)

In addition the outstanding breaches from the 2023 inspection relating to Regulation 9 had not been met.

Following our inspection, the provider informed us that the issue relating to staff being unable to access the fire extinguishers had been addressed.

Updated 18 December 2020