- Care home
Harboro
Assessment report published 10 November 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
The assessment began on 8 September 2025 and concluded on 3 October 2025.
Harboro is a care home providing accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. At the time of the assessment the provider was supporting 4 people with learning disabilities. The provider has been rated as good and we did not identify any breaches of regulation.
This was a comprehensive assessment of a care home for adults with learning disabilities and autistic people. The provider demonstrated a positive safety culture, promoted dignity and respect, and maintained strong medicines governance. People were supported by staff who understood their needs and worked collaboratively with health professionals to reduce risks and improve outcomes. Relatives consistently described staff as caring and attentive, and we observed warm, respectful interactions that promoted privacy and independence.
The service was designed to promote independence, choice, and inclusion. Care was person-centred and focused on supporting people to live meaningful lives. Staff demonstrated values and behaviours that upheld people’s dignity and human rights, and the leadership team fostered a culture of respect, empowerment, and continuous improvement.
The environment was clean, well maintained and adapted to meet people’s needs. Governance systems were embedded, with regular audits, clear accountability and a culture of openness where staff felt confident to speak up. Leaders were visible, approachable and promoted inclusive values aligned with Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture principles. People had access to health services, and staff used evidence-based approaches such as positive behaviour support to reduce restrictions and promote ordinary life outcomes.
While we identified some areas where further development would enhance the service, such as improving the consistency of accessible information, strengthening co-production initiatives, and continuing to build on outcome monitoring, these did not significantly impact the overall quality of care. The provider was already taking steps to address these areas, and people continued to experience safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led support.
We have 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.
People's experience of this service
People and their families told us they generally felt safe, well cared for and treated with kindness and respect. We observed warm, patient interactions where staff gave people time, explained what they were doing and maintained privacy during personal care. Relatives consistently described staff as caring and attentive, with one person saying “there are a mixture of staff. Some are quieter than others, some are real characters; they make [person] laugh… I think the staff work well together’ We were told that incidents of distress experienced by residents were managed appropriately by staff.
Families valued the continuity provided by long-standing staff and the homely atmosphere of the provider. They told us people had access to health professionals and were supported to attend appointments, which helped maintain their wellbeing. Some relatives highlighted positive outcomes, such as improved weight management and increased community access, while others felt activity planning could be more ambitious and less staff led. One person told us, “I do feel [person] could do more,” and concerns were raised about outings being limited by staffing or transport availability.
Feedback on communication was mixed. While relatives appreciated updates via a mobile messaging app and regular review meetings, some reported unanswered emails and limited feedback opportunities. A few relatives felt their suggestions on menus, activities and healthy eating had not led to sustained improvements.
Overall, people experienced caring and respectful support that promoted dignity and independence, but improvements were needed to strengthen co-production, embed accessible information, and ensure feedback consistently informed service development.