23 Church Street

Who the service is for

This service is a specialist service that supported people with mental health needs, a learning disability and autistic people.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 were treated with respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence, and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 13 October 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.

People received safe, effective and person-centred care from staff who understood their needs and preferences. There was a positive learning culture, with incidents, accidents and safeguarding concerns reviewed and lessons implemented. Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities, and people felt confident concerns would be recognised and acted upon. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs, staff had completed required training, and systems supported the safe ordering, recording and monitoring of medicines.

People’s needs were recorded within care plans, including how they wished to be supported. Staff understood the importance of obtaining consent before providing care, support or treatment, and healthcare professionals were contacted appropriately when required. People were treated with dignity and respect, listened to and supported to maintain their independence. They had choices about their personal space, daily activities and the care they received.

Care was personalised around people’s individual needs, likes and dislikes. People felt involved in decisions about their care and spoke positively about the support they received. Staff knew people well, and the evidence indicated people experienced positive outcomes. For example, staff advocated for a person during a hospital admission when they identified that the person’s learning disability was not being fully considered by medical staff.

The service demonstrated the principles of Right support, right care, right culture. People were supported to exercise choice, control and independence; care was person-centred and promoted dignity. Staff and leaders demonstrated values and behaviours that supported people to feel listened to and involved. People were supported to access the local community but also enjoyed going on trips, including seaside locations and music festivals.

Governance arrangements included audits to monitor care quality and maintain oversight of the service. Experienced and knowledgeable managers were involved in the day-to-day running of the service and demonstrated a commitment to the people supported. Learning, from other services operated by the provider, was used to reduce risks. Staff spoke positively about their colleagues and managers and felt supported and involved in the service.