- Independent mental health service
The Langford Centre
Assessment report published 29 October 2026
Contents
Ratings - Forensic inpatient or secure wards
Our view of the service
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.
People's experience of this service
We spoke to seven people who used the service and family members and we received mixed feedback. All the patients we spoke with told us that they felt safe on the ward, and staff treated them with dignity and respect. They told us that they were supported to stay in touch with family and friends, the food was good and were able to take their leave as agreed. They also told us that they had the opportunity to participate in activities on the ward.
Family members told us that they were treated well by staff and they were involved in their family member’s care and treatment where appropriate. They told us that they were contacted weekly by the service with updates. A family member described staff members as friendly and helpful and their experiences of the service as positive.
However, all the patients we spoke with told us that while they had the opportunity to attend regular community meetings, these were neither effective nor productive. Three patients told us that staff often spoke in languages that are not English on the ward. We also received mixed feedback from patients about staff involving them in their care and treatment. While one patient told us that the ward rounds were good and they felt listened to, other patients told us that they felt ignored during meetings and that staff talked about them, not to them.