During an assessment under our new approach
About the service
The service is a small care home for up to 5 people. There were 3 people living at the service at the time of the assessment.
Who the service is for
This service is registered to support people with physical disabilities, autistic people and people with a learning disability. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ (RSRCRC) is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people, and providers must have regard to it. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture (RSRCRC)’ 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 also provides complex specialist support to people who are living with mental health conditions.
The service uses a household model of care. People live in small groups that share a kitchen, lounges, and dining area. This helps create a familiar home environment where staff can support people in a more personal and flexible way.
Key findings
We carried out this assessment on 15 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions. They had choice, control and freedom over their lives. Due to the level of risk within the service chinaware, glass, sharps and other household items such as batteries were kept locked away. A person said, “I haven’t swallowed [batteries] for 6 years, there are no batteries in house. In my bedroom I have a special key where they lock the door to my cupboards]. They explained this made them feel safe. If they wanted anything from the cupboards, they were able to access this freely with staff and we saw this during the assessment. A staff member said, “The ladies have fluctuating capacity, [person] knows why her cupboards are locked, these decisions are made through discussions, meetings and in best interests. They all understand.”
People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Staff were supported to gain qualifications in health and social care as well as undertaking training to meet each person’s care and support needs. Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. We observed staff following risk assessments and people’s care and support plan guidance. There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were administered safely and there were systems in place to ensure the environment was safe. We observed a person requesting as and when required medicines to help their anxiety, staff spoke calmly and gently with the person explaining that if they felt they needed the medicine, they could have it, but they discussed other methods of calming and relaxation as well, which the person opted for.
Staff knew people really well and knew the signs of deterioration in physical or mental health. This helped people receive timely health interventions.
There was a friendly, calm atmosphere at the service. Staff recognised they were working in people’s homes and treated it with respect. A staff member said, “It is their house and their home.”
Staff worked well as a team, and they told us they received good support from the registered manager and other staff employed by the provider such as the nominated individual and the wellbeing team. Staff gave us examples of how they had been supported to maintain their own wellbeing at work.
A staff member said, “There is a lot of care and love for the residents, it is a really nice place to work.”