Edwardian

The service was last inspected in February 2018 and was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.

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.

This inspection took place from 20 January 2026 to 14 February 2026. Site visits took place on 20 January and 12 February 2026. The first visit was unannounced, the second took place out of hours.

Care records were stored on a secure electronic system with updates input on tablets. A new staff member had been recruited to assist with the transition from paper-based to electronic records – this had been accomplished well in the last 12 months.

People's care records contained clear and easy to understand information about their individual needs and risks and how to support them effectively.

For those people who were not always able to express their needs and wishes verbally or when a person had declining mental health, staff used personalised communication profiles, including descriptions of each person’s gestures and body language, which enabled them to recognise early signs of distress and respond before concerns escalated.

People received their medicine safely and were supported to access the support of health care professionals when needed.

The provider had taken steps to minimise the risk of abuse because staff knew how to identify and report it. Staff immediately escalated a concern about a person who had a fall, and managers shared this promptly with health services, the local authority and CQC.

Team meetings included short safeguarding reflection exercises where staff discussed learning from national cases and how it applied to their service.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. Staff told us they received training to enable them to carry out their role. Staff received effective supervision and a yearly appraisal.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to take positive risks to engage with the community as independently as possible, for example going to the cinema in a small group; another person was able to gain part-time employment, and another had started volunteering.

People were encouraged to personalise their rooms, and staff supported people to create a memory wall in the activities and social space which helped them manage periods of low mood.

People received a varied and nutritional diet and were complimentary of the food provided. People were encouraged to support food preparation and choices were always respected.

The interactions between people and staff showed staff knew people well. Staff had good knowledge of people's needs and spoke with genuine affection about the people they supported. The atmosphere at the home was homely, relaxed and nurturing. It was clear people felt relaxed and comfortable in the company of staff. The management team were approachable, and they, alongside the staff team worked in collaboration with external agencies to provide good outcomes for people. Processes were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided and drive improvement.

The service fully lived up to the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture – focusing on people’s strengths and promoting what they can do but also meeting their dreams and ambitions.