Steps 2 Limited

Who the service is for

This was a specialist service for autistic people, people with a learning disability and people with physical disabilities. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment between 16 September and 22 September 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 received safe, person-centred care and support which enabled them to achieve positive outcomes and maintain their independence. Staff understood people’s individual needs, risks and communication preferences and supported people to make choices about their lives and remain active in their local communities. Care plans reflected people’s health, wellbeing and support needs and staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals where needed. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of care, including incidents, medicines, care plans, staff training and recruitment. People were supported to make choices, maintain their independence and access their local communities in line with the principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. The service supported people living in their own homes, where the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) do not apply. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how restrictions on people were managed. Care records for 2 people incorrectly referred to DoLS authorisations being in place. We discussed this with the local authority, who confirmed there were no Court of Protection orders in place and both people were awaiting review of their current arrangements. The registered manager acknowledged the recording was inaccurate and agreed to update the care records to reflect people’s current arrangements. People we spoke with did not raise concerns about restrictions on their freedom or choice.

People continued to access their local communities and take part in activities that were important to them. Staff supported people to make choices and maintain their independence wherever possible.