- Care home
West Lancashire Short Break Services
Assessment report published 4 September 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 15 to 24 July 2025 . This service provided short breaks to adults living with physical disabilities or learning disabilities, and autistic people.
This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is someone who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service, and be legally responsible for the quality and safety of care provided and compliance with regulations. At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post, but a new manager had been employed and had applied to register.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. This guidance supported judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choice, independence and access to local communities that most people take from granted.
Incidents were learnt from, safeguarding processes were robust, and action was taken following behavioural incidents to minimise the risk of reoccurrence. Staff supported people through their transition to ensure continuity of care. The environment was designed to support the delivery of safe care and was found to be clean and hygienic. There was generally enough safely recruited and trained staff to meet people’s needs. Systems in place ensured medicines were managed safely.
The service involved people and relatives in creating and reviewing support plans, and staff had a good understanding of current good practice and standards. Information sharing between the team, relatives and other services was good. Staff encouraged people to make healthier choices and supported people to achieve positive outcomes. Staff sought consent prior to care interventions.
Staff treated people, relatives and partners with kindness and respect and knew people, their needs and preferences well. People were supported to use the sensory room or access meaningful activities. Staff understood when people were in pain or distress and acted quickly to minimise this. Workforce wellbeing was prioritised and staff felt valued.
The service ensured care was person-centred and staff understood the needs of people with learning disabilities and autistic people, working flexibly with relatives and other services. Clear and transparent information about the service was shared with people and their relatives, and the manager took the time to listen and respond to feedback. The provider ensured excellent equity in access and staff had a good understanding of equality and diversity. People were offered support to help them prepare for important life changes.
There was a positive and caring culture and managers led by example. Staff were encouraged to speak up and were treated fairly. The service worked closely with other local services to share learning and resources. There was good oversight at the service, and the manager expressed a commitment to improving the service and people’s experience.
However, information in people’s support plans and risk assessments was not always robust or contemporaneous, and records relating to consent required a review.
People's experience of this service
People and their relatives were mostly happy with the care and support people received. Comments included “[Person] loves it at the service, absolutely loves it. They’re very happy,” “Staff are good at looking after [person], they seem to entertain [person], there’s nothing I would change,” and “It’s a home from home.”
People and relatives were regularly involved in making decisions about people’s care. A relative told us, “I’ve seen [person’s] support plan and I’m involved with it, and all the review meetings.” Another added, “[Staff] will always contact me with any problems or decision making.”
Some people could not directly tell us about their experiences, so we used observations to assess their experience of care. Staff were seen to interact with people positively in a kind and caring manner, and the environment was friendly and relaxed. A person told us, “I like it, I get on with all the staff. Staff are kind and funny.” Another nodded and smiled when asked if staff were kind.
People were encouraged to give feedback using an easy read form, and relatives knew who to speak to about complaints, confirming the manager was responsive to any concerns. A relative said, “There have been some niggles. The manager is aware of it and in fairness does sort it.” Another added, “We do get questionnaires and are asked if we are satisfied. There’s nothing to change, it works brilliantly.”
People were asked what they would like to do during their stays and spoke about the community-based activities available. A person told us, “I like going out when it’s a nice day. I have played bingo here before and do jigsaws. Staff took me out to play bowling and have tea.”
People and their relatives benefited from a flexible service, and continuity of care from a small, consistent staff team.