- Care home
Support for Living Limited - 37 Barlby Road
Assessment report published 18 September 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Support for Living Limited - 37 Barlby Road is a care home without nursing. 37 Barlby Road provides care and support for up to 4 people living with complex learning disabilities and physical disabilities.
People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this assessment. At 37 Barlby Road people have their own rooms and share bathroom facilities.
The assessment included an unannounced visit to the service which took place on 31 July 2025.
The last rating for this service was good (published 11 January 2018). This assessment was scheduled due to the age of this rating. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ 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.
The service was able to demonstrate they were meeting some of the principles of Right support, right care, right culture. We found the service had imposed a restriction on all the people living at the service, in an attempt to manage the risk posed by 1 person. The service could not show this restriction had been fully assessed and managed to ensure it was in the best interests of all the people at the service.
Medicines were not always safely managed.
The provider’s systems for identifying and mitigating risks as well as improving quality had not always been effective.
We also found aspects of the management of the service lacked a creative problem-solving approach which meant people living at the service, who had complex needs did not always have access to the full range of options for managing these needs in the most dignified way.
We identified breaches of legal regulations relating to safe care and treatment and good governance.
Following our visit to the service, the provider started to make improvements for areas where we identified concerns.
People were supported by knowledgeable staff who understood their needs and promoted their wellbeing.
People’s needs and choices were assessed. Although people did not use words to communicate their needs, staff understood how each person communicated their choices and needs and these was documented in care support plans.
People were encouraged to participate in activities outside of the service and staff understood what people liked to do, and how they liked activities to take place.
Staff supported people to get good healthcare and understand about healthy living. Staff communicated with external healthcare professionals and advocated for people when needed.
The management of the service ensured care records were up to date and relevant. People living at the service appeared to be happy and well cared for.
Staff had a range of training relevant to their roles. Staff and managers worked with others to monitor the service and to maximise on people’s health.
The provider was working with the service to minimise the risk of a closed culture by supporting the management team to address issues and providing staff with the information they needed and opportunities to speak up. The provider had responded well to issues raised at this assessment and put plans in place to make improvements to the service.
People's experience of this service
People using the service were happy. We met everyone who used the service and spent time observing how they were cared for and supported. People were not able to tell us verbally their views of the service. However, we observed they were relaxed, happy and comfortable with staff. One relative gave positive feedback as their family member “appears to be settled, happy and well-liked by the staff.”
Staff engaged with people well and offered them the right amount of choice. People were relaxed and had specific activities they were involved in. There was a calm and supportive atmosphere at the service and people were respectful of each other.
While stakeholders we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards.