- Care home
Greenways
Assessment report published 8 January 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 2 October 2025 to 8 October 2025. Greenways is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 6 adults with a learning disability. At the time of our assessment, 6 people were living at the service. The assessment took place to follow up on warning notices we served on the provider following our last assessment in 2024. We identified improvements had been made in all areas, but further improvement was needed in relation to staffing. The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding, good governance and staffing. Improvements were found at this assessment in all these areas and the provider is no longer in breach of these regulations, although further improvement was needed in some areas of governance. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ 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. We identified the provider was meeting the standards of care set out in this guidance. There were inappropriate numbers of staff to support people when accessing the community, which had left people at risk of harm. Furthermore, staff members regularly worked two consecutive 15-hour days with a sleep-in night shift between these. Sleep in staff were regularly woken to support people’s heightened anxieties and behaviours, meaning the provider could not be assured they were receiving appropriate sleep between day shifts in order to deliver safe and effective care. Following our assessment, the registered manager ensured both staff members on the night shift were waking nights. They also ensured these staff members did not work a day shift either side of their night shift. Governance systems required further work in some areas to ensure they were fully effective in their use of identifying areas of improvement. For example, further work was required in areas such as accident and incident reporting, to ensure details were noted so any learning from events could be completed and prevention measures put in place effectively. The service was clean and hygienic. There were plans to move to develop and move people’s bedrooms within the service to allow for better outcomes for all people involved. Staff felt supported by the management team and strategies were in place to ensure the working environment was engaging for staff and promoted their wellbeing. Staff were aware of their responsibility to protect people from abuse and harm, and to follow the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff knew people well and were passionate in improving their lives. Staff were empowered to ‘think outside the box’ and promote activities that could improve people’s wellbeing and outcomes. Staff communicated handovers of people’s needs efficiently.
People's experience of this service
We were unable to gather verbal feedback from people about the service they received. Therefore, we spoke to their relatives and observed the care people received.
Relatives were extremely happy with the care provided to their family members. Reports from relatives included, “[Person] is very happy, and I can see a big change in her for the best. Staff are really good, and she always feels safe” and “a couple of staff treat him like their own family and look out for him.” We observed kind and compassionate interactions between people and staff, who clearly knew them well as individuals.
People were given opportunities to access various activities both inside the home and in the community. Relatives had noted other improvements since our last inspection. One relative said, “I’ve seen changes like photos around the home, which makes it more welcoming and I’m happy with his care.” Another told us they and other family members were always kept informed but felt management were doing a little more now as they were, “A little more hands on with [person].”
People’s privacy was respected, and they were encouraged and enabled to be independent in their choices wherever possible.