Orbital 4 Support Limited

This was a comprehensive inspection that covered all key questions and quality statements. The unannounced inspection was conducted in response to concerns raised with us, to assess the quality of care provided and the provider's compliance with legal requirements. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. This guidance supported judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choice, independence and access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the provider was not always delivering care in line with these principles.

Right Support

The provider did not have effective governance processes to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service. Risks to people’s safety were not always appropriately assessed, and actions to mitigate those risks were not always taken promptly. Governance processes were inconsistent, and recruitment checks were not always robust. Staff did not consistently receive appropriate training, supervision or appraisal to ensure they had the skills and support needed to deliver safe, high‑quality care. As a result, people did not always receive support that promoted independence or enabled them to lead full and active lives.

Right Care

Staff interacted with people with kindness and respect and valued their individuality. They responded to people’s immediate needs and acted to minimise discomfort, concern or distress. However, people did not always receive person‑centred care. Care planning and decision‑making did not consistently reflect people’s wishes, strengths or goals. People’s capacity to make decisions and give consent was not always effectively assessed or documented, and opportunities for people to make their own choices were not consistently supported. These gaps meant care was not always tailored to what mattered most to each person.

Right Culture

The service lacked a consistent approach to continuous learning, innovation and improvement. Although staff told us they felt supported by management and confident that concerns would be acted upon, systems did not always promote transparency, accountability or ongoing development. Staff described an equitable and inclusive culture and felt part of a positive community working to support people. However, the provider’s limited oversight and inconsistent application of safe practices meant the culture did not fully embed the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture. This affected the provider’s ability to ensure people consistently received high‑quality, safe and person‑led care.

At this assessment, we found three breaches of regulation relating to need for consent, good governance and fit and proper persons employed.

We have requested an action plan from the provider in response to the concerns identified.